Engagement in Social Roles in Multiple Life Domains

Much research has shown that engagement in social roles in work and nonwork life (family, leisure, social, community, etc.) produces a positive, fulfilling state of mind characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. Vigor reflects a high level of energy and mental resilience in role engagement in multiple domains. Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one’s roles at both work and nonwork by experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, and challenge. Absorption is characterized by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in tasks associated with the various roles across life domains.

Individuals are likely to achieve a high level of overall life satisfaction when they are fully engaged in multiple roles, both at work and outside of work. Increasing satisfaction in multiple domains ultimately increases overall life satisfaction. The effect of role engagement across multiple social domains on life satisfaction can be explained by the principle of satisfaction limits, which we now turn to. The bottom-up spillover model of life satisfaction proposes that life satisfaction is determined by the cumulative satisfaction experienced in important life domains, such as work, family, social, leisure, spiritual, and community. Mathematically, the compensatory model states that an individual's life satisfaction score can be predicted by summing the satisfaction scores across salient life domains. For example, if one uses an 11-point satisfaction scale (-5=high dissatisfaction to +5=high satisfaction), then an individual (A) registering moderate satisfaction in work life (e.g., “+3”), family life (e.g., “+3”), leisure life (e.g., “+3”), social life (e.g., “+3”), and material life (e.g., “+3”) should have a higher overall life satisfaction score than another individual (B) who registers high satisfaction in work life (e.g., “+5”), but no satisfaction across family life (e.g., “0”), leisure life (e.g., “0”), social life (e.g., “0”), and material life (e.g., “0”). This is due to the fact that the first individual (A) has a total domain satisfaction score of “15” [(+3) + (+3) + (+3) + (+3) + (+3)], whereas the latter has a total domain satisfaction score of only “+5” [(+5) + (0) + (0) + (0) + (0)]. Of course, this predictive equation assumes that work life, family life, leisure life, social life, and material life are all equally salient to both individuals. Overall life satisfaction in a given situation is the sum of satisfaction across multiple life domains. Note that because life domain salience can vary widely from person to person, based on factors such as priority ideology and role identity, this method is not perfect for predicting life satisfaction, but it remains a useful tool. Nevertheless, research has shown that adding satisfaction scores across various life domains is a strong predictor of overall life satisfaction; thus, there is some validity to this compensatory model of life satisfaction.

The Principle of Satisfaction Limits

The principle of limited contribution posits that the contribution of domain satisfaction from a single life domain to overall life satisfaction is limited. In the example of the compensatory model described above, the limit is +5 satisfaction units in each domain (scale = +5 to -5). In other words, one can achieve only a limited amount of overall satisfaction from a single life domain (a maximum of 5 satisfaction units). Using the example above, Person A is satisfied in work life (“+3”), leisure life (“+3”), social life (“+3”), material life (“+3”), and family life (“+3”). His total life satisfaction (15 units) reflects moderate satisfaction across five salient life domains. Person B is satisfied with work life (+5) only. He is not satisfied with family life (“0”), leisure life (“0”), social life (“0”), or material life (“0”). His life satisfaction score (5 units) is affected only by satisfaction in 1 of 5 salient domains. In sum, an individual who is moderately satisfied across multiple domains is likely to experience higher life satisfaction than an individual who is highly satisfied in a single domain. As such, role engagement in multiple life domains produces an additive effect on overall life satisfaction. This means that high role engagement in a single life domain, with little or no engagement in other domains, contributes less to overall life satisfaction than high role engagement across multiple domains. This tenet counters the folklore about finding one passion in your life and the advice to harness it fully. Of course, doing so may boost personal happiness, but doing so exclusively at the expense of other life domains may be detrimental to it.

Consider the following study: Study participants were asked to discuss others' life satisfaction (friends, family members, associates, etc.). Most participants intuitively inferred that others' life satisfaction was directly related to their satisfaction across multiple domains. They calculated happiness by summing satisfaction across several important domains — the more positive affect across multiple domains, the greater the subjective well-being (i.e., overall life satisfaction). In a work context, individuals who engage in various social roles outside work life, in addition to work roles, are likely to experience higher life satisfaction than those who are highly engaged only in work life.

To reiterate, individuals with high role engagement across multiple life domains are likely to improve their life balance and experience higher life satisfaction than those with high role engagement in a single domain. This effect is largely due to the principle of satisfaction limits, which holds that there is only so much satisfaction one can derive from a given life domain that contributes to overall life satisfaction. In other words, there is a ceiling effect — a threshold above which further satisfaction cannot add value to life satisfaction overall. Compared with individuals engaged in a single domain, those highly engaged across multiple life domains are likely to experience higher total life satisfaction, as each domain contributes to the total. Those engaged in a single domain experience only limited domain satisfaction (less than those engaged in multiple domains), which does not translate into total life satisfaction. Compared with role engagement across multiple domains, role engagement in a single domain is likely insufficient to make a significant contribution to overall life satisfaction.

Strategies of Social Roles in Multiple Domains

In this section, I will describe three key strategies that well-balanced people use to engage in social roles in multiple domains. These are (1) avoid putting all your eggs in one basket, (2) contemplate the ideal life, and (3) assess how much time you spend in what role and re-allocate time. See Table 1.

Table 1: Strategies of Social Roles in Multiple Domains

Strategy	Description
Putting all your eggs in one basket	Invest time, energy, and other resources in social roles in multiple domains to guard against possible severe and catastrophic life events that may cause clinical depression or significant life dissatisfaction.
Imagine the ideal life	Examine life goals and aspirations, at least in the next few years. Doing so should help assess the degree of importance of the different life domains. The selected life goals should then serve as the basis for envisioning the roles and activities needed to achieve them.
Re-allocate time	Examine how much time is allotted in different life domains for different roles. Adjust the allotted time across various life domains to achieve some degree of parity among them.

Avoid Putting All Your Eggs in One Basket!

“Putting all your eggs in one basket” is not a good idea. It is always better to have multiple baskets. Imagine dropping your one and only basket. All your eggs are now broken, gone, spoiled, destroyed. If you had divided your eggs into multiple baskets, you could have spared yourself this disaster. Let’s translate this adage into human terms. Mike is a detective in a law enforcement agency. He is a workaholic and is married to his job. As such, he doesn’t have a family, friends, or hobbies. However, he loves his work. It gives him a chance to demonstrate to others both how smart he is and how essential he is in solving important criminal cases. Mike feels that his job gives him significant life satisfaction and is a major source of his personal happiness. Catastrophe strikes. He loses his job due to a political situation at work beyond his control. After being fired, Mike has no other areas of his life to draw comfort or happiness from. Now compare this situation with another detective. His name is Sam, and he is not a workaholic. He has a robust life outside of his professional career. He has a loving family — a devoted wife and two children who consider him their hero. He has good friends and neighbors. Lastly, he has a hobby that he greatly enjoys: aerial photography. He and his family spend much of their leisure time flying his drone and enjoying the beautiful landscape photos it captures at various attractions. Sam is much more likely to weather the storm of being unemployed than Mike. Sam’s personal happiness is likely to decrease somewhat and may cause a small degree of mental anguish, but nothing compared to Mike's. Mike is likely to plummet into depression.

Upon self-evaluation, if your own situation or worst-case scenario is comparable to Mike’s, then it is time to reassess your life course. You need to make changes in your life to take on multiple roles — ones that will give you some degree of satisfaction. As I demonstrated with the principle of satisfaction limits, don’t rely on getting too much of your life satisfaction from a single domain. Everyone should lead a well-rounded life, which means getting involved in multiple areas. Become engaged in multiple roles, the type of roles that may result in some satisfaction. Don’t expect ecstasy from any given role. A little satisfaction from a multiplicity of roles is good enough to guard against future disasters.

Imagine the Ideal Life

Take a minute or two to imagine your ideal life. What do you want from life, or what are your aspirations? Let’s revisit Mike’s life scenario. To reiterate, Mike is a detective who loves his job — a workaholic who has not found time for family or friends. Both his priority ideology and role identity are heavily reliant on his job, as he derives much of his self-worth from the prestige that solving criminal cases confers. Mike’s job is virtually his only source of life satisfaction and happiness.

Again, compare your situation with Mike’s to identify roles and domains you may want to invest in—those that could give you greater satisfaction and contribute to your overall life satisfaction. Comparing your life with Mike’s should make you aware that you need to be involved “with life” – multiple roles in several domains, so that you can gain additional satisfaction that will add to your overall personal happiness.

You can do this using the pie chart shown in Figure 1. The pie chart provides a visual representation of your life domains. The chart shows several life domains: work life, family life, love life, financial life, and health and safety. These are the most common life domains for both men and women. Each domain is represented by a slice of the pie. You can create your own pie chart with unique domains to represent your salient life areas. In other words, you may want to relabel the slices and perhaps add or delete others. But let’s use the pie chart shown in Figure 2 as a hypothetical example to illustrate the concept. Imagine an individual named Sandra, a young single woman starting her first job. Examining Figure 2, the relative size of each slice of her pie shows that all of her domains are equally important to her at this time in her life. However, fast-forward many years: Sandra is now a 35-year-old single mom who has been divorced for the last three years. She currently has a 5-year old daughter. However, she knows she wants more children and is aware of her age and the potential risks that come with it. In her case, she now feels that family life must take precedence over her other areas of life. As such, Sandra’s life goals and aspirations have shifted to focus more on family life, at least in the short term—over the next 4-5 years. Looking at Figure 3, she has expanded the family “slice” and shrunk the other slices to accommodate this shift in priorities.

Once this is done, Sandra should articulate concrete roles that will help her achieve her new goal of having more children. In other words, what specific roles can she envision, and specifically what activities should she engage in to meet role expectations in order to achieve the goal of having more children? These new roles and activities may involve placing greater emphasis on her love life to find a potential father or investing more heavily in her health and safety to explore alternative means of conception. This plan may also involve making changes in several other areas, such as her work and financial life. Specifically, she plans to reduce her workload and save more money to ensure her future family's financial stability. While Sandra has realigned her priorities to focus more on family, to maintain her previous overall level of life satisfaction, she should also remain minimally to moderately engaged in all of her other pie slices. In the event that her attempts to have more children failed, she would then not be as likely to experience severe emotional distress.

Before	After

Re-allocate Time

Pause for a moment and examine how you allocate time across different roles and life domains. Consider the case of Tom. When asked how many hours he spends per week on work, he responds, “around 70 hours.” When asked how many hours a day he spends with his wife and children, he responds, “2 hours around dinner time.” When asked how many hours he spends socializing with friends, he responds, “2-3 hours every month.” Here we have a person who is highly engaged with his work role but not very engaged in other life roles. Guided by the principle of satisfaction limits, my advice to Tom is to reallocate his time among work, family, and socializing with friends. He certainly needs to spend less time at work and reallocate those hours to caring for his family and socializing with friends.

I recommend using the same pie chart shown in Figure 2 to assess the time allotted to various life domains versus the time needed to make changes in one’s life to become more engaged in multiple roles across multiple domains. It should be noted that a greater emphasis on the family slice seemed beneficial in Sandra’s case, as it was part of a predetermined plan to increase future life satisfaction. Once her goal is achieved, she will reallocate time to equalize the size of her pie slices. In Tom’s case, his priorities needed to be reallocated because they were significantly out of balance due to his own negligence, causing problems in his non-work domains.

Lessons Learned

This module focused on the idea that life balance can be achieved, at least in part, through engagement in social roles across work and nonwork domains. Doing so contributes significantly to overall life satisfaction. This is explained by the principle of satisfaction limits, which posits that the contribution of a single life domain to overall life satisfaction is limited. In other words, high role engagement in a single life domain, with little or no role engagement in other domains, cannot match the total life satisfaction of moderate role engagement across multiple domains. Of course, the more an individual is engaged in certain social roles, the happier they become with these roles and the associated life domains, which, in turn, contribute to overall life satisfaction.

I then described three key strategies that well-balanced people use to engage in social roles in multiple domains, namely (1) avoid putting all your eggs in one basket, (2) contemplate the ideal life, and (3) assess how much time you spend in what role and re-allocate time. “Avoid putting all your eggs in one basket” is a personal strategy that calls for investing time, energy, and other resources in social roles across multiple domains to guard against severe, catastrophic life events that may cause clinical depression or significant life dissatisfaction. The “imagine the ideal life” strategy encourages individuals to examine their near-term goals and aspirations. Doing so should help assess the degree of importance of different life domains. The selected life goals should then serve as the basis for envisioning the roles and activities needed to achieve them. Last but not least is the “re-allocate time” strategy. This strategy calls for examining how much time is allotted to different life domains in relation to the roles they support. The individual should allocate time across various life domains to achieve some degree of parity among them.

Engagement in Roles in Health, Love, Family, Material, Social, Work, Leisure, and Culture Domains

Earlier, I spoke about how people typically try to optimize their life satisfaction; that is, they aim to raise it to an acceptable level by actively engaging in social roles across multiple domains. The question that arises now is “which domains?” The answer is that life satisfaction increases significantly when an individual engages in roles across life domains that satisfy the full spectrum of human developmental needs. Therefore, achieving a balanced life is best supported by active participation in social roles across various domains that address both basic and higher-level needs. Basic needs pertain to survival requirements such as food and shelter, while growth needs encompass advanced aspects such as social connections, esteem, self-actualization, knowledge, and creativity. Specifically, engagement in social roles in the health, love, family, and material domains primarily satisfies basic needs. Engaging in social, work, leisure, and cultural activities helps fulfil growth needs. Let us be more specific.

I have long argued that subjective well-being is not simply the sum of positive minus negative affect, irrespective of the source (i.e., the specific needs associated with the experienced affect). Subjective well-being or overall life satisfaction involves the satisfaction of the full spectrum of human developmental needs — the full range of needs, not a handful of arbitrarily selected needs. In other words, one cannot substitute positive emotions related to one's need for those related to another.

To illustrate this point, let us consider the following example. There are two individuals, person A and person B. Person A has “+2” satisfaction units (on a scale from -5 (strong dissatisfaction) to +5 (strong satisfaction) in each of the following domains related to basic needs: health, life, love, family, and material. In other words, Person A is satisfied in domains related to his basic needs, with a total score of “+8” satisfaction units [(+2) + (+2) + (+2) + (+2)]. Person A is similarly satisfied in life domains related to growth needs (social life, work life, leisure life, and culture life), with another total of “+8” [(+2) + (+2) + (+2) + (+2)]. Summing up Person A’s domain satisfaction scores, we obtain a total amount of “16” units of domain satisfaction (+8 satisfaction units from domains related to basic needs, and another +8 satisfaction units from domains related to growth needs). Now, let us compare this case with Person B, who is highly satisfied with only basic needs. Person B is highly satisfied in all domains related to his basic needs, with a total score of “+20” satisfaction units [(+5) + (+5) + (+5) + (+5)] while they are dissatisfied in domains related to his growth needs, a total of “-8” satisfaction units [(-2) + (-2) + (-2) + (-2)]. As such, the total domain satisfaction score for person B is also “+12”. However, person A is likely to report a higher degree of life satisfaction than person B because person A has balanced satisfaction from life domains related to both basic and growth needs, whereas Person B has unbalanced domain satisfaction (high satisfaction in domains related to basic needs but low satisfaction in domains related to growth needs).

The Principle of Satisfaction of the Full Spectrum of Human Developmental Needs

Let us delve deeper to understand the psychology underlying the concept of balanced satisfaction. We will do so by discussing the principle of satisfaction of the full spectrum of human developmental needs. This principle posits that individuals who are satisfied across the full spectrum of developmental needs (i.e., growth needs as well as basic needs) are likely to have higher life satisfaction than those who are less satisfied. Of course, you say. However, the point is not satisfaction per se but the source of that satisfaction, namely the full spectrum of human developmental needs (i.e., basic and growth needs). In other words, higher levels of need satisfaction contribute to higher life satisfaction when satisfaction stems from both basic and growth needs, rather than from either alone. When people engage in multiple roles across life domains, they are likely to gain access to more psychological and physical resources, which in turn increases opportunities to satisfy many basic and growth needs. Seeking to satisfy a specific need within a single life domain does not significantly contribute to life satisfaction. That is, when people engage in multiple roles, they are likely to experience satisfaction of growth needs (i.e., social, knowledge, aesthetics, self-actualization, and self-transcendence) as well as of basic needs (i.e., health, safety, and economic). Satisfaction with both basic and growth needs contributes significantly to life satisfaction.

Specifically, I have described how people live their lives to fulfill their developmental needs. To satisfy developmental needs, individuals engage in a variety of activities. The events related to those activities, along with their outcomes, generate both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. These affective reactions are organized and stored in memory within specific life domains, such as health, love, family, and economics. For example, to meet their biological and health needs, people engage in activities such as eating well, exercising regularly, and getting regular check-ups. When a man is asked how he feels about his health, he is likely to reflect on his emotional experiences regarding it. When asked about their love life, a person might reflect on their emotional experiences with love, romantic relationships, and sex. When asked about his family life, he might reflect on experiences with his spouse and children, as well as his residence, neighborhood, and community. Financial issues and experiences related to money, income, standard of living, and material possessions are likely to be segmented in material life and mostly related to basic needs. With respect to growth needs (e.g., social, esteem, self-actualization, self-transcendence, aesthetics, and knowledge), experiences may be segmented across life domains such as social, work, leisure, and cultural life. However, this does not mean that a variety of developmental needs can be met within a single domain. Consider the work domain, for example. In the workplace, both basic (i.e., economic, health and safety, and family-related needs) and growth needs (i.e., social, esteem, self-actualization, self-transcendence, knowledge, and aesthetics) can be met. To reiterate, across all life domains, a variety of developmental needs can be met. However, certain life domains are more likely to meet certain developmental needs than others. As such, the health, love, family, and economic domains are likely to reflect satisfaction stemming more from meeting basic needs than from growth needs. Conversely, social life, work life, leisure life, and cultural life are domains likely to reflect satisfaction that results more from meeting growth needs than basic needs.

Support for this principle (the principle of satisfying the full spectrum of human developmental needs) comes from evidence showing that materialism is negatively correlated with life satisfaction. Specifically, materialistic people can be seen as imbalanced, as they pursue wealth and material possessions to the exclusion of other important life goals. Materialistic people who can hoard material wealth may feel successful and happy with their material lives. However, placing undue emphasis on making money (to satisfy basic needs such as biological and safety needs) is likely to lead them to neglect other growth needs, including social, esteem, self-actualization, self-transcendence, aesthetics, and knowledge. It is no wonder that many studies have found materialism to be negatively correlated with life satisfaction. In essence, materialism is an “excessive” condition that adversely affects life balance by preventing the materialistic individual from satisfying a full range of human developmental needs across multiple life domains. “Workaholism” is also an excessive condition with similar effects on life balance and subjective well-being. A workaholic constantly seeks professional success to the exclusion of other important life goals. In general, individuals who fixate on a specific domain or role are likely to experience dissatisfaction with life because they forgo the satisfaction of the full spectrum of human developmental needs, both basic and growth.

Life balance can be viewed as congruence between desired and actual time spent on activities, and as equivalence in the degree of discrepancy between desired and actual time across activities that satisfy basic and growth needs (health, relationships, challenge/interest, and identity).

In sum, the preceding discussion can be captured as follows: Individuals who have a high level of role engagement in life domains related to both basic needs (e.g., health, love, family, and material domains) and growth needs (e.g., social, work, leisure, and culture domains) are likely to experience greater satisfaction among life domains contributing to higher life satisfaction than those who have a high level of role engagement in domains related to only basic or growth needs. Specifically, compared with individuals engaged in roles only in select domains, those engaged in multiple domains that satisfy both basic and growth needs are likely to experience greater life satisfaction. Role engagement in health, love, family, and material domains are likely to satisfy mostly basic needs (survival needs such as having enough resources to deal with health and safety issues), whereas role engagement in social, work, leisure, and culture are likely to satisfy mostly growth needs (higher-order needs such as social, esteem, self-actualization, aesthetics, and knowledge needs). The combined, balanced fulfillment of both basic and growth needs increases life satisfaction. That is, satisfaction of the full spectrum of human developmental needs (a balance between basic and growth needs) produces the highest level of life satisfaction.

Strategies of Engagement in Roles in Health, Love, Family, Material, Social, Work, Leisure, and Culture Domains

Now, I will discuss several basic strategies designed to meet basic needs. I refer to them as “maintenance strategies” because they help us continue “functioning.” We need to function daily, and yes, we need to do so reasonably well to flourish. I will address “flourishing strategies” shortly.

At one time, I had a colleague at my university who had an imbalanced life. He devoted more than 90% of his work time to research and writing—specifically, research and writing intended for publication. Being at a research university, research and writing are a must. We live by the adage: “publish or perish.” However, in reality, it is “publish and prosper.” My colleague was highly motivated to engage in this endeavor because it satisfied his “growth needs”— the needs for esteem, self-actualization, knowledge, and creativity. The problem was that he was so sloppy. His office was a mess. He would have a hard time finding reports, books, and research materials in his office. Luckily, he had at least two graduate assistants and a secretary who helped. Thus, maintenance tasks (such as organizing files, developing PowerPoint slides, typing reports and manuscripts, making travel arrangements, servicing his computer and other multimedia gadgets) were someone else’s responsibility, never his. Even his phone's contact list was not his responsibility. Unfortunately, modern technology has displaced graduate assistants and secretaries. In the modern landscape of today’s universities, graduate assistants are not often assigned “gofer-like duties.” University administration expects faculty to involve their graduate students in their own research, leading to publications. That is, graduate students become, in essence, research interns working on projects that eventually lead to publication, in which they are acknowledged for their research contributions if their career goals involve academia. Alternatively, the research effort should pave the way to a professional position in the industry. Secretaries no longer perform “secretarial duties” in the traditional sense. They no longer support faculty in typing their manuscripts and making travel arrangements. Their positions have been transformed into technical specialties such as financial accounting, inventory and logistics, research compliance, among others.

Going back to my “old-fashioned” colleague, the “maintenance” support he once had is no longer available. His passion for research and writing has been hampered by his chaotic lifestyle. His scholarly productivity plummeted, and he refused to adapt to the rapidly evolving landscape of research universities. He became frustrated and angry at every turn. He complained constantly that the world around him kept crashing down. Most other university faculty learned to adapt by taking on new roles that had once been reserved for graduate assistants and secretaries. They learned how to use information technology to get things done efficiently. Thus, to engage in “flourishing” activities, one also needs to do “housekeeping.” Housekeeping duties are required to allow individuals to both function and flourish.

So, what are some maintenance strategies to facilitate normal functioning? Maintenance strategies tend to satisfy basic needs rather than growth needs. Conversely, flourishing strategies involve behaviors designed to satisfy growth needs. We can identify maintenance versus flourishing strategies by focusing on life domains — health, love, family, material, social, work, leisure, and culture. Here is a list of maintenance versus flourishing behaviors, organized by the aforementioned domains (see Table 1).

Table 1: Maintenance and Flourishing Strategies Commonly Used in Health, Love, Family, Material, Social Work, Leisure, and Culture Domains

Life Domain	Maintenance and Flourishing Strategies
Health and safety	Maintenance strategies: Maintain a healthy lifestyle by engaging in regular physical exercise and eating a well-balanced diet. Have regular health checkups and follow your doctor's orders. Flourishing strategies: Make physical exercise a sport. Make cooking a hobby. Plan social outings with nutritious meals and physical exercise.
Love life	Maintenance strategies: Make plans for the future to maintain your relationship with your romantic partner, such as buying a house together. Attend couples counseling to maintain a healthy relationship. ` Flourishing strategies: Take your spouse out for a romantic dinner. Get together with good friends as a couple. Travel with your significant other. Reminisce about positive experiences you shared as a couple. Make love in exotic locations.
Family life	Maintenance strategies: Maintaining a good relationship with family members requires significant time, effort, and money. This may include childcare, schooling, meal preparation, caring for the sick, elderly care, household chores, and shopping for family needs, among many other “essential” tasks. ` Flourishing strategies: Flourishing entails injecting fun and passion into the family mix. Examples include planning a family vacation, hosting social events with family members, participating in sports with them, and engaging in leisure activities together.
Material life	Maintenance strategies: Perform a job that generates enough income to cover bills and buy essentials. Buying necessities such as groceries and personal care items. ` Flourishing strategies: Invest in future growth and consume goods and services that offer novelty and excitement.
Social life	Maintenance strategies: Attend important family functions, such as weddings and funerals. Support relatives and friends when they are sick or are in need. Attend social events to strengthen your bonds with co-workers. ` Flourishing strategies: Play an exciting game with your friends regularly. Go out with friends on a social outing — dinner and a movie. Join a social club that meets regularly.
Work life	Maintenance strategies: Arrive or begin work on time every day, avoid excessive absences, and perform your required job duties promptly. ` Flourishing strategies: Set career goals. Develop concrete plans to attain career goals. Monitor the progress toward goal attainment.
Leisure life	Maintenance strategies: Engage in leisure activities that can help you relax and de-stress. ` Flourishing strategies: Engage in competitive games that allow you to express related skills and mastery. Start a new hobby that you enjoy.
Cultural life	Maintenance strategies: Engage in cultural activities to learn about your own culture and those of others in other places. ` Flourishing strategies: Travel to destinations that reflect your personal identity, spirituality, and heritage. Travel to destinations to learn about other people's cultures and expand your knowledge and wisdom.

Lessons Learned

In this module, I discussed how people achieve a sense of balance and maintain an acceptable level of life satisfaction by actively engaging in social roles across multiple domains, including health, love, family, material, social, work, leisure, and cultural life. I described the principle of satisfaction of the full spectrum of human developmental needs—individuals who are satisfied with the full spectrum of developmental needs (i.e., satisfaction of growth needs as well as basic needs) are likely to have a higher level of life satisfaction compared to those who have higher satisfaction but across fewer developmental needs. When people engage in multiple roles across life domains, they are likely to gain access to psychological and physical resources, which in turn increase opportunities to satisfy many basic and growth needs. To satisfy these developmental needs, individuals engage in a variety of activities. The events related to those activities, along with their outcomes, generate both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. These affective reactions are organized and stored in memory across domains of life, such as health, love, family, and finances. With respect to growth needs (e.g., social, esteem, self-actualization, self-transcendence, aesthetics, and knowledge), experiences may be segmented across life domains such as social, work, leisure, and cultural life. In every life domain, a variety of developmental needs can be met. However, certain life domains are more likely to meet certain developmental needs than others. As such, we argue that the health, love, family, and economic domains are likely to reflect satisfaction stemming more from meeting basic needs than from growth needs. Conversely, social life, work life, leisure life, and cultural life are domains likely to reflect satisfaction that results more from meeting growth needs than basic needs.

I then described life balance strategies people use in health and safety, love life, family life, material life, social life, work life, leisure life, and cultural life. I distinguished between maintenance and flourishing strategies that people use across various life domains. Maintenance strategies are designed to minimize dissatisfaction by meeting basic motivational needs, whereas flourishing strategies are designed to maximize satisfaction by meeting growth needs. Flourishing strategies involve engaging in cultural activities that reflect one’s personal identity, spirituality, and heritage. To achieve a balanced life, the assertion was made to engage in BOTH maintenance and flourishing activities in health and safety, love life, family life, material life, social life, work life, leisure life, and cultural life.

Integrating Domains with High Satisfaction

Integrating life domains that house high levels of positive affect (or satisfaction) is yet an important personal strategy to help achieve life balance and enhance subjective well-being. Doing so serves to maintain life satisfaction at acceptable levels. Consider the owner of a mom-and-pop store whose family residence is situated on the top floor of the store. His wife and children help at the store by staffing the checkout stand, maintaining inventory, and dealing with suppliers and customers. In this situation, the store owner’s work life is closely intertwined with his family life, marital life, social life, material life, and perhaps community life as well. The store is highly successful, with a steady stream of patrons, a good reputation in the neighborhood, and a decent income that supports his family and a few other jobs in the community. Success in these varied roles translates into positive affect in work, family, marital, social, material, and community life. Thus, integrating work and family life increases satisfaction in both domains. This phenomenon, known as “positive spillover,” will be discussed in some detail in the next section of this chapter. The positive spillover effect does not address situations in which satisfaction in one domain is accompanied by dissatisfaction in another (e.g., the store is financially successful but causes problems in the marital life because the husband and wife have been fighting over how to manage the store's inventory). This situation may involve a mix of positive and negative spillover, which is not addressed in this chapter. The mix of positive and negative spillover could best be addressed through role conflict, a topic covered in a different module.

Two related and highly similar theories dealing with the management of boundaries between life domains addressed the concepts of domain integration and positive spillover, namely boundary theory and work-family border theory. Boundary theory focuses on work and nonwork domains, whereas work-family border theory focuses more particularly on work and family domains. These theories argue that people create psychological boundaries between work and nonwork domains. Some create boundaries to segment domains, while others create more permeable boundaries to allow role integration. Our focus here is integration. Specifically, boundary strength refers to the degree of flexibility and permeability of domain boundaries. Flexibility refers to the extent to which a mental boundary contracts or expands in time and space depending on the demands felt in one domain or the other. For example, an individual may erect a work domain boundary with high flexibility (in terms of space and time) to allow him to work outside of both his traditional workspace and work time. In contrast, permeability refers to the extent to which feelings experienced in one domain can spill over into another. For example, an individual may segment work and family domains to prevent negative feelings from family life from spilling over into work life, or vice versa. As such, segmentation is viewed as one polar extreme on a continuum, with integration at the other. In relation to segmentation (one polar extreme along the segmentation-integration dimension), boundaries between work and family domains are highly impermeable and least flexible. Conversely, the opposite is true in relation to integration (the other polar extreme of the segmentation-integration dimension). That is, in integration, we see the same boundaries as highly permeable and most flexible. Integration allows the individual to transition easily between the work and family domains. This is the key benefit of integration.

Let us further delve into this discussion of positive spillover. Experiences in work and nonwork life may spill over. That is, affect may spill over from work life to nonwork life and vice versa. This is what industrial/organizational psychologists commonly refer to as “affect spillover.” Affect spillover can be either positive or negative. Positive affect spillover refers to the transfer of positive mood from one life domain to another. Conversely, negative spillover refers to negative mood spilling over from one domain to another.

Consider the following case involving two individuals, Mike and Tom. Both men experience “+1” units of satisfaction in work life and “+3” units of satisfaction in family life. However, Tom decides to integrate the work and family domains (e.g., by working from home and taking care of family responsibilities at work). Tom was highly successful in integrating work and family domains. Doing so increased his satisfaction in work life from “+1” to “+3,” whereas his satisfaction in family life remained at “+3.” Tom achieved work-life balance through positive spill-over. In contrast, Mike did not bother to integrate the two domains; hence, he continued experiencing “+1” satisfaction in work life and “+3” in family life. In this case, positive spillover from domain integration led to greater satisfaction with family life for Tom and, consequently, higher subjective well-being.

The Principle of Positive Spillover

The principle of positive spillover states that positive affect in two highly integrated life domains amplifies domain satisfaction, which, in turn, spills over into overall life satisfaction. That is, positive affect that spills over across life domains increases satisfaction in both domains. For example, sharing positive work experiences increases family satisfaction by fostering positive mood among family members. Furthermore, positive affect in one role can boost motivation and energy to engage in another role in a neighboring domain. Thus, positive affect in one domain may increase the likelihood of successful performance in another domain, leading to greater satisfaction in that domain, which, in turn, increases overall life satisfaction. In other words, increased satisfaction in the respective domains contributes additively to life satisfaction.

In sum, individuals who experience positive spillover across two or more life domains through domain integration are likely to report greater satisfaction in those domains than those who do not. Such an increase in domain satisfaction contributes to life balance by increasing or maintaining life satisfaction at an acceptable level.

Integration Strategies

Several integration strategies have been researched in the literature on industrial/organizational psychology. These include teleworking, using information and communication technologies, and participating in the gig economy. See Table 1.

Table 1: Domain Integration Strategies

Strategy	Principle
Teleworking	People who telework have greater opportunities to integrate their psychological selves across life domains than those who do not.
Use of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs)	The use of ICTs can help those who use an integration strategy maintain a sense of balance in their lives. ICTs allow people to move from one role to another, one life domain to another, more frequently and effortlessly.
Participating in the Gig Economy	Work-life balance can be achieved through participation in the gig economy, as workers have greater freedom to schedule work and non-work tasks.

Teleworking

People who telework have greater opportunities to integrate their psychological selves across life domains than those who do not. Researchers have increasingly studied telework to understand its impact on work-family conflict. Telework may take place during regular office hours as well as outside regular office hours (“after hours”), and is considered an alternate work method. Telework should not be confused with “supplemental work” or “overtime.”

Telework, as an integration strategy, tends to decrease work-to-family conflict (stress originating from work that spills over into family life) due to greater flexibility and control over work pacing and scheduling, as well as more time at home. However, there may be situations in which integration may be a source of work-to-family conflict — stress from work spilling over to family life. Telework blurs the boundary between work and family domains, potentially interfering with family affairs due to work demands, thereby adding to rather than diminishing work-family conflict. A lack of a boundary between work and home life may also make it difficult to mentally disengage from work, thereby contributing to work-family conflict. This point reflects the Imbalanced Life. That is, this is a major cause of life imbalance.

Use of Information Communication Technologies

The use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) such as the internet and smartphones has blurred the boundaries between work and nonwork. ICTs allow people to move more frequently and effortlessly between roles and life domains — especially when they use an integration strategy to balance work and life. For example, while working, a person can achieve greater integration by easily replying to friends’ and family members' instant messages on their smartphone. That is, workers can respond to personal messages with little to no impact on their job performance. The integration of professional and personal lives is increasingly common among many organizations and workers. As such, the use of ICTs can help integrate work and nonwork life.

Consider the following study, which examined the role of ICTs in family-to-work conflict and work–family balance satisfaction, and the moderating effect of integration in this process. The study's findings indicated that high levels of ICT use were associated with greater family-to-work interference. That is, the use of ICTs can help those who use an integration strategy maintain work-life balance, but, conversely, it negatively affects those who use a segmentation strategy to keep their work life separate from their personal life.

Participating in the Gig Economy

The gig economy refers to freelance and contract work rather than permanent positions. Examples of participating in the gig economy include driving for a ride-sharing service like Uber or Lyft, delivering food through an online delivery service like Grubhub, DoorDash, or Uber Eats, or making and selling crafts on a platform like Etsy. Working in the gig economy provides a measure of flexibility regarding work that is often absent in permanent positions. Workers in industries that rely heavily on computer software and the internet are ideal for the gig economy. For example, journalists use their personal computers to write stories and copyedit. They can do so from home at times most convenient to them, without interfering with other responsibilities. As such, the concept of work-life balance is now reconceptualized to account for the gig economy's emergence. The rise of gig work allows workers to integrate work life with other life domains, boosting productivity while enabling workers to achieve a work-life balance.

Consider the following study that focused on Uber drivers in London. The study found that although most drivers do not earn much, they report higher levels of life satisfaction than other workers. The researchers attributed the drivers' higher life satisfaction to their preferences for flexibility and autonomy, which, in turn, helped them achieve work-life balance. The study highlighted the importance of non-monetary factors such as work-life balance in contributing to subjective well-being in the gig economy.

Lessons Learned

In this module, I have described the domain integration principle, which states that balance can also be achieved by integrating life domains that house high levels of positive affect or satisfaction. Doing so helps maintain or increase life satisfaction to acceptable levels by amplifying it. That is, life satisfaction can be increased to acceptable levels by integrating work and family life, thereby increasing satisfaction in both domains (i.e., positive spillover). This means that positive affect in two highly integrated life domains amplifies domain satisfaction, which in turn spills over into overall life satisfaction.

I discussed several integration strategies, namely telework, the use of information communication technologies, and participation in the gig economy. Regarding teleworking, research has shown that people who telework have greater opportunities to integrate their psychological lives across life domains than those who do not. Research has shown that the use of ICTs can help those who use an integration strategy maintain a sense of balance, as ICTs allow people to move from one role to another—one life domain to another—more frequently and effortlessly. Lastly, participating in the gig economy helps workers exert greater control over their work schedules and enjoy greater autonomy. Control and autonomy help with work-life balance, which in turn contributes to overall life satisfaction.

Compartmentalizing Domains with High Dissatisfaction

Consider the following scenario comparing two individuals (persons A and B) who are experiencing dissatisfaction at work: -3 units of dissatisfaction on an 11-point scale varying from -5 (very dissatisfied) to +5 (very satisfied). However, both individuals are satisfied with their family life (+3 satisfaction units). Both individuals are experiencing negative affect spillover from work life to family life. That is, their dissatisfaction at work (-3 units of satisfaction) is influencing their mood at home, causing friction and stress in family life. Person A decides to address the high dissatisfaction at work by compartmentalizing their work life to prevent future negative spillover of work-related affect into family life. That is, they decide that at home they will not think about, speak about, or engage in any work-related activities. By doing so, Person A maintains their satisfaction with family life at the previous level (+3). Person B does not segment, and thus experiences decreased satisfaction with family life due to negative spillover from work. Person A ends up with a better work-life balance and greater life satisfaction than Person B.

Negative affect in a life domain is likely to spill over into other domains when there is high overlap across domains in terms of time, space, effort, and resources. To prevent spillover of negative affect into other life domains, individuals create and maintain psychological, physical, or behavioral boundaries around their domains. For example, workers can segment the family life domain from the work life domain. At home, they do not converse about work experiences. Work-life issues stay at work, and home-life issues stay at home.

Research has demonstrated that overall happiness comprises separable well-being variables (e.g., work satisfaction, home satisfaction, and life satisfaction). These variables sometimes move in different directions over time. This finding suggests that some people — at times — can prevent the spillover of negative affect between life domains.

The Segmentation Principle

Let us now delve further into the psychological dynamics concerning the effect of segmentation on life satisfaction. How do people use segmentation to enhance their subjective well-being? When people feel dissatisfied in one life domain and realize they have little control over changing that outcome, they try to “seal off” the domain where the dissatisfaction resides. They do so to maintain a certain level of overall life satisfaction (i.e., to ensure it does not drop below an intolerable level). In essence, affect (i.e., emotions or feelings) from one domain “spills over” into other domains, and people “segment” their affect in certain domains in order to prevent affect from spilling over.

Again, there are two overlapping theories of boundary management between life domains: boundary theory and work-family border theory. Boundary theory focuses on work and life domains, whereas work-family border theory focuses more on work and family domains. These theories argue that people create psychological boundaries between work and nonwork domains. As such, psychological boundaries can vary along a continuum from high to low segmentation. Specifically, boundary strength refers to the permeability of domain boundaries. Permeability refers to the degree to which emotions experienced in one domain can spill over into another domain. That is, an individual may erect an impermeable boundary between work and family domains in such a way as to prevent bad feelings from family life from spilling over into work life or the other way around. In contrast, another individual may have a permeable boundary that allows both positive and negative feelings from work life to flow into family life, and vice versa. As such, high segmentation is viewed as one polar extreme on a continuum, with low segmentation as the other. For example, a highly segmented person may never bring work home, have no home office, and does not take work calls when at home. This person has a highly impermeable boundary between work and family life. Whereas a low-segmented person works primarily from home and therefore has a highly permeable boundary between work and home life.

We know from past studies in industrial/organizational psychology that high permeability between work and nonwork domains is associated with greater work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Work-to-family conflict is the stress an individual may experience at home due to work-related problems. Conversely, family-to-work conflict is work-related stress caused by family-related problems.

As such, the segmentation principle posits that individuals who segment life domains can prevent the spillover of negative affect across domains—thereby preventing both work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Segmenting dissatisfying life domains from other life domains contributes to overall life satisfaction by protecting satisfaction in the other domains. Segmentation of a life domain with negative experiences is also important because it serves as a coping mechanism and a buffer against declines in subjective well-being. Much research on work-life balance has provided substantial evidence of the segmentation effect. Consider the following meta-analytic study (i.e., a study that analyzes effect sizes across multiple studies) on the effect of work-family conflict. Based on 209 samples and 994 effect sizes, the study indicated that work–family conflict explains 2.20% and 6.20% of the variance in job and family satisfaction outcomes, whereas segmentation explains 54.10% and 48.50% of the same outcomes, respectively. In layman’s terms, this means that work-family conflict is likely to be a strong factor in influencing satisfaction in work life and family life.

The concept of segmentation can be summarized as a behavioral life-balance strategy. Compared with individuals who do not compartmentalize their dissatisfactions, those who do manage to reduce the likelihood of decreases in overall life satisfaction. That is, compartmentalizing negative affect in one domain protects neighboring domains from negative spillover, thus preventing them from slipping into dissatisfaction, thereby preventing overall declines in life satisfaction.

Segmentation Strategies

Segmentation strategies can be classified into four categories: (1) temporal – control time, (2) physical – physical boundaries, (3) behavior – negotiate boundaries, and (4) communicative – managing expectations. See Table 1 for a summary of these strategies and Table 2 for example survey measures.

Table 1: Domain Segmentation Strategies

Strategy	Principle
Temporal segmentation	Segmentation by creating time boundaries: One can separate work life from family life (or vice versa) by making decisions and changes to one’s daily calendar.
Physical segmentation	Segmentation by physical boundaries: One can insulate a domain by engaging in domain-related activities within specified spatial boundaries (e.g., the physical space of a home residence serves as a boundary protecting family life).
Behavior segmentation	Segmentation by behavior-based boundaries: For example, using two e-mail accounts to separate professional from personal life.
Communicative segmentation	Segmentation by managing boundaries with others: For example, request that supervisors and co-workers refrain from calling at home to discuss job-related concerns outside business hours.

Temporal Segmentation

Temporal segmentation refers to segmentation involving time control. In other words, one can segment work life from family life (or vice versa) by making decisions and scheduling changes in one’s daily calendar. For example, one can create an impermeable boundary around family life by deciding that after-work hours are exclusively reserved for family time. No time will be allotted to work-related tasks. Temporal segmentation allows the individual to derive satisfaction from the compartmentalized domain by allocating much more time and energy to it alone. Doing so increases individual involvement and engagement in that domain, which, in turn, may lead to higher satisfaction.

Examples of survey items that capture temporal segmentation include: “While at work, I try to manage blocks of time so that I can keep work separate from family.” This item captures temporal segmentation in the work domain to ensure that family demands would not interfere with work, thereby protecting the work domain from other domains, such as family life. “While at home, I try to manage my time such that family time is family time, not work time” is another survey item capturing temporal segmentation of the family domain.

Physical Segmentation

Recent research has found that the increased use of mobile technologies blurs the boundaries between work and family, making segmentation difficult. Today, more than ever, we have easy access to work-related platforms, such as e-mail, from our homes and mobile devices. This access is designed to enhance our ability to work remotely. This is, of course, both good and bad. The downside of this enhanced work accessibility, or what some scholars call “24/7 availability,” is that it may generate additional stress in other areas of life. Working from home can add stress by allowing work to intrude on family life. This is a good illustration of the challenges of physical segmentation in the modern workplace.

To further illustrate, consider the following survey item capturing physical segmentation of family life: “When I’m physically at home, I try not to address work-related issues so I can focus on my family. This item illustrates how people segment their family life from interference from work by making and implementing the decision to protect the family domain through a physical barrier, the actual home residence. That is, physical segmentation involves attempts to identify spatial boundaries and to insulate the domain by deciding to engage in domain-related activities within specified spatial boundaries — the physical space of the home residence becomes the boundary protecting family life. Thus, the use of physical boundaries to segment a given domain allows the individual to focus on and experience greater satisfaction in that domain, as well as be more psychologically engaged in it. As such, to implement physical segmentation, avoid addressing work-related issues when you are physically at home so you can focus on your family. This means strict adherence to physical separation within the home — you should only work in the home office or another designated workspace. You engage in nonwork activities only when you are outside that space.

Behavior Segmentation

Consider the following survey item to capture behavioral segmentation in the work domain: “While at work, I use technology to help keep family demands out of my work life.” This item indicates a specific behavior (e.g., using technology to help the person focus on work responsibilities and minimize potential interference from family).

For example, using call screening (i.e., caller ID on your phone) or having two separate calendars or e-mail accounts on one device allows individuals to manage their boundaries. Caller ID allows the individual to identify the caller; if the caller is from work, the individual may reject the call, thereby allowing them to be fully engaged in family life with little interference from work life. How about not answering your work email at home? Here, the segmentation is not only based on the physical space of being at home but also on the concrete action of not responding to work-related communications, period. The result of behavioral segmentation is to ensure maximum satisfaction in the family domain. Given the prevalence of technology, behavior-based segmentation is extremely important for regulating separation between work and family domains. The use of behavior segmentation that keeps family out of work should contribute to greater job satisfaction and job engagement, and similarly, keeping work out of family should contribute to greater family satisfaction and family engagement.

Communicative Segmentation

Industrial/organizational psychologists studying work-life balance assert that work contact (i.e., communication with work colleagues related to work matters) represents a ‘‘boundary-spanning demand’’ that blurs the boundaries separating work life from non-work life. This boundary-spanning demand is distinct from job-related demands such as long work hours and excessive pressures. Work contact, as a boundary-spanning demand, hacks away at the border separating work life from other life domains. As such, it is considered a potential stressor. To alleviate this potential stress, the individual should request that their supervisor and other co-workers refrain from contacting them outside the workplace or during work hours (by any means of direct communication, such as phone calls, text messaging, or e-mail) to discuss work-related issues. In most cases, such requests are honored, and they are more enforceable when the individual makes them explicit, perhaps in writing. This is the essence of communicative segmentation. Of course, in an age of pandemics in which many people work from home, work contact is the new normal. As such, a communicative rule such as “don’t communicate with me while I am at home” is not realistic. The best one can do is to say to work colleagues, “You can communicate with me by e-mail or text anytime, but I’ll respond during work hours and only during those hours.”

To reiterate, communicative segmentation involves managing others’ expectations regarding boundaries. That is, a boundary is erected by signaling to others that certain actions constitute boundary violations, hence the plea to respect one’s boundaries. Consider the following survey item: “I have indicated to my boss that I cannot work past the end of my normal workday unless it is a rare circumstance.” Here the individual has managed to erect a boundary around his family domain by communicating to their boss that the home is their sanctuary and to refrain from expecting them to engage in work-related matters during “family time” (possibly evenings and weekends) By communicating their expectations to others (family members, co-workers, and boss), the individual can segment the work and family domains assuming that these expectations are adhered to and violations would not occur. As such, communicative segmentation is likely to contribute to greater engagement in the protected domain, thereby ensuring greater satisfaction within it.

Lessons Learned

This module focused on segmentation — how people create psychological “walls” around life domains to contain negative affect and prevent its spill over into other domains. Compared with individuals who do not compartmentalize their dissatisfied domains, those who do reduce the likelihood of declines in overall life satisfaction. That is, compartmentalizing negative affect in one domain protects neighboring domains from negative spillover, preventing them from slipping into dissatisfaction and thereby preventing declines in life satisfaction.

The research provides extensive information on several commonly used segmentation strategies, namely temporal, physical, behavior, and communicative. Temporal segmentation involves creating time boundaries. That is, one can segment work life from family life (or vice versa) by making decisions and scheduling changes in one’s daily calendar. Physical segmentation involves creating physical boundaries. That is, one can insulate a domain by deciding to engage in domain-related activities within specified spatial boundaries (e.g., the physical space of home residence becomes the boundary protecting family life). Behavior segmentation involves creating boundaries through specific actions. An example is the use of two e-mail accounts to separate professional and personal life. Finally, the communicative segment refers to negotiating others' expectations. An example is requesting that supervisors and co-workers refrain from calling home to discuss job-related concerns.

Reallocating Resources across Domain

Research suggests that individuals who are dissatisfied with their jobs allocate more resources to more satisfying nonwork activities, such as leisure, family, or religion. Consider the following study comparing the quality of life between people living in rural and metropolitan areas. The study found that both groups report equivalent levels of life satisfaction. However, metropolitan residents reported greater satisfaction with family and close friends, whereas rural residents reported greater satisfaction with the community and agricultural productivity. The finding suggests that life satisfaction is maintained through compensation. That is, decreases in satisfaction in one domain are compensated by increases in satisfaction in another. Specifically, compensation occurs when an individual who repeatedly experiences dissatisfaction in one life domain allocates significant mental or physical resources from another life domain to offset the satisfaction deficit. Rural residents, who had fewer opportunities to socialize frequently with friends and family, compensated by gaining satisfaction from their community and the fruits of their agricultural labor.

In other words, individuals who feel dissatisfied in a life domain (Domain X) and allocate more mental and physical resources from that domain into another life domain (Domain Y) are likely to experience higher levels of life balance and life satisfaction overall than those who feel equally dissatisfied (in Domain X) but do not reallocate resources from there to another life domain (e.g., Domain Y). Allocating mental and physical resources to another life domain (Domain Y) increases life balance and satisfaction in that domain (Domain Y) to compensate for the decrease in satisfaction in the original domain (Domain X), thereby maintaining an acceptable level of life satisfaction.

The Compensation Principle

Dissatisfaction in a salient life domain tends to reduce overall life satisfaction. This is because overall life satisfaction is strongly influenced by satisfaction in individual domains. Hence, decreases in satisfaction in one domain are likely to decrease overall life. For example, decreases in satisfaction with work life are likely to reduce overall life satisfaction. And decreases in overall life satisfaction are very troubling. People do what it takes to prevent significant decreases in overall life satisfaction. They may do this by reallocating resources across domains to offset decreases in satisfaction in one domain with increases in satisfaction in another. Doing so helps maintain the level of overall life satisfaction the person has come to accept. The key point here is compensation — or trading off decreases in satisfaction in one domain for increases in satisfaction in another. This is a life balance strategy.

How do researchers provide empirical evidence for the compensation effect? Is there a direct measure capturing compensation? The answer is no. Researchers have pointed to an inverse (or negative) relationship between satisfaction in two life domains (e.g., greater satisfaction with work life is associated with lower satisfaction with leisure life, and vice versa) as evidence of compensation. In other words, according to the compensation principle, there should be an inverse relationship between satisfaction in competing domains (e.g., work and family). The individual attempts to fill gaps in one domain with satisfactions from the other.

Consider the following study. The researchers surveyed 1,383 employed persons to capture their work and leisure activities, using five task attributes (influence, variety, pressure, skill utilization, and interaction) to test the compensation principle between work and leisure. The study revealed that high-status occupations (such as physicians or business owners) showed significant decreases in attributes such as influence, variety, and skill‐utilization from work to leisure. That is, high-status employees experience high levels of influence, variety, and skill utilization in their work lives but fail to experience the same positive benefits in their leisure lives. This finding applies only to high-status employees, not those with low status (such as janitors or hospital orderlies).

The compensation principle can best be understood in terms of homeostatically protected mood (or HPMood). This concept refers to the idea that people have a baseline — or set point — for their normal level of life satisfaction. This set-point is mostly stable and typically in the medium-to-positive range, for example, scoring 80 points on a 100-point rating scale (ranging from low to high life satisfaction). The set-point is not easily modifiable, and homeostatic forces are always at work to restore life satisfaction to its set-point after an imbalance occurs. When life satisfaction is constant, emotions shift away from the set point, triggering homeostatic forces to restore the status quo. Thus, affective experience normally oscillates around an individual’s set-point. Homeostatic forces regulate the system to ensure that dissatisfaction in a life domain does not decrease subjective well-being, while also working to restore life satisfaction to its set point.

When a homeostatic imbalance occurs, a set of homeostatic buffers is activated in order to restore balance. These buffers involve unconscious defenses, namely behavior and cognitive defenses. Thus, positive or negative deviations from the set-point tend to activate the buffers to restore homeostasis. These buffers tend to be activated more forcefully in response to negative than to positive deviations from the set point, because negative affect is associated with threats to survival. Chronic negative deviations from the set-point can overwhelm the buffers, resulting in chronic negative homeostatic imbalance (i.e., psychopathological conditions such as depression). One of the buffers is compensation. That is, compensation is a form of either a cognitive or behavior defense designed to restore homeostatic balance in life satisfaction.

Compensation Strategies

Two compensation strategies have been well researched in the work-life balance literature: value-based compensation and behavior-based compensation. See Table 1.

Table 1: Compensation Strategies

Compensation Strategy	Definition
Value-based strategy	Individuals reduce the importance they ascribe to a negative role in a life domain to lessen the impact of domain dissatisfaction on overall life satisfaction.
Behavior-based strategy	Individuals invest more time and energy in an alternative role within another domain to generate domain satisfaction, thereby helping maintain overall life satisfaction.

Value-Based Compensation

Life balance can also be achieved by optimizing domain satisfaction by mentally changing domain salience. Consider the following scenario: Person A is satisfied with family life (+3 units of satisfaction on an 11-point scale varying from +5 to -5) but not satisfied with work life (-3 satisfaction units). Person A also believes that both family life and work life are equally important (0.8 importance points to each domain on a 1.0-point importance scale varying from “0” as “not important at all” to “1.0” as “extremely important”). Hence, family satisfaction is “+2.4” [(+3) x (0.8)], and work satisfaction is “-2.4” [(-3) x (0.8)]. Person B is also in the same boat — they feel happy with family life but unhappy with work life. Person B also believes that both domains are equally important. Note that in both cases, there is marked satisfaction in family life (“+2.4”) and dissatisfaction in work life (“-2.4”). How do people manipulate the interplay between/among the domains to enhance life satisfaction overall?

Person A makes a cognitive change by increasing the salience of family life—increasing the importance weight from “0.8” to “1.0.” This results in “+3.0” satisfaction points [(+3) x (1.0)] in family life. Decreasing the salience of work life—decreasing salience weight from “0.8” to “0.1” results in “-0.3” satisfaction units [(-3) x (0.1)] in work life. That is, satisfaction in family life increases—from “+2.4” to “+3.0” [(+3) x (1.0)] and dissatisfaction in work life decreases—from “-3.2” to “-0.3” [(-3) x (0.1)]. Meanwhile, person B makes no cognitive changes and remains the same. Thus, person A was able to increase satisfaction in family life and decrease dissatisfaction in work life through value-based compensation. Doing so increases overall life satisfaction.

The theory of value-based compensation is supported by research showing a significant correlation between domain satisfaction and domain importance. That is, domains in which people express high levels of satisfaction are likely to be treated as more salient than domains with low satisfaction (or dissatisfaction). Consider the following study. Researchers collected data on subjective well-being, domain satisfaction, and domain importance using a population of immigrants to Australia. The data clearly revealed a pattern of correlations in which most domain satisfaction scores were significantly correlated with their corresponding domain importance scores — friendship, material possessions, family recreation, and nation. Also consider research in social psychology showing that people report things they are not proficient at as less important than those they are proficient at. These findings also align with the positive correlations between domain satisfaction and domain importance. These correlations indicate that people tend to assign greater importance to life domains in which they feel satisfied, and conversely, lower importance to domains in which they feel less satisfied. This is the essence of value-based compensation.

To reiterate, value-based compensation reflects an association between domain satisfaction and domain salience. People increase the salience of domains in which they feel satisfied and decrease the salience of domains in which they feel dissatisfied. Why? They do so to increase life satisfaction — or at least prevent life satisfaction from falling below an acceptable level. Another study attempted to capture the value-based compensation effect by developing an index that reflects the correlation between have-want discrepancy scores across 12 life domains and the perceived importance of these domains, at the individual level. Individuals who engage in compensation are those who perceive life domains with high satisfaction to be more important than others. This phenomenon is referred to as the “shifting tendency.” Correlations between the shifting tendency and life satisfaction (as well as domain satisfaction scores) were positive, suggesting that the shifting tendency may be a strategy that enhances subjective well-being.

Consider this other study on adaptive life-span development. The study, based on a large social survey of US adults (the Midlife in the United States National Longitudinal Study of Health and Well-Being -- MIDUS I and II), indicated that individuals’ domain-specific role engagement is positively related to their domain-specific situation quality and perceived control. That is, individuals place greater importance on goals in domains where they have an established record of success and attainment.

In sum, the preceding discussion can be summarized as follows: Individuals increase domain satisfaction by increasing the salience of satisfied domains, and, conversely, decrease domain dissatisfaction by decreasing the salience of dissatisfied domains. Overall life satisfaction increases as a result.

Behavior-Based Compensation

Consider the following scenario. Person A is becoming increasingly unhappy with family life—satisfaction with family life drops from +3 to -2. This drop in satisfaction with family life is likely to adversely influence their overall life satisfaction. Person B is similarly unhappy with family life — satisfaction drops from +3 to -2 units. Person A becomes more engaged at work by taking on more responsibility, socializing with his co-workers, and getting more recognition from his boss. That is, his satisfaction in work life jumps from a mere +1 unit of satisfaction to +4, a whopping increase of +3 units. This increase in work-life satisfaction offsets the decrease in family-life satisfaction. Person B does not address his family situation (-2) nor work to increase satisfaction in any other domains. Ultimately, Person A’s life satisfaction is maintained, while Person B’s life satisfaction drops significantly.

Many seminal studies on work-life balance have documented that work involvement is inversely correlated with nonwork involvement. That is, the greater the involvement in work life, the less involvement in nonwork life. Other evidence suggests that individuals who are dissatisfied with their work tend to increase their engagement in nonwork roles. For example, individuals in low-status jobs often feel dissatisfied with their jobs. To compensate for this dissatisfaction, they become more involved in leisure activities. For example, they take significant pleasure and place great importance on winning prizes in a leisure activity, such as organized league bowling.

Also consider the research on materialism. There is substantial evidence that materialism (the strength of financial aspirations) is negatively related to subjective well-being. That is, those who score highly on measures of materialism report lower levels of subjective well-being, and vice versa. One explanation involves the notion of shopping or “retail therapy.” Those who lack close friends and other social resources tend to compensate by shopping. In other words, shopping becomes therapeutic and a means of behavior-based compensation.

Lastly, we can further refine the behavior-based compensation strategy by breaking it into two tactics: supplemental and reactive. An individual may engage in supplemental compensation when positive experiences are insufficient in one life domain (e.g., work life); and because there are insufficient positive experiences, they are therefore pursued in another domain (e.g., family life). In contrast, reactive compensation occurs when the individual harbors negative experiences in one domain (e.g., work life). To address the dip in life satisfaction (a consequence of increased dissatisfaction in the aforementioned domain), the individual compensates for this deficit by pursuing positive experiences in another domain (e.g., family life).

Lessons Learned

In this module, I described how people achieve a certain degree of life balance by using compensation—reallocating resources from one life domain to another. That is, individuals who feel dissatisfied in one life domain (Domain X) and allocate more mental and physical resources away from that domain and into another life domain (Domain Y) are likely to experience higher levels of life satisfaction than those who feel equally dissatisfied (in Domain X) but do not reallocate resources to another life domain (e.g., Domain Y). Allocating mental and physical resources to another life domain (Domain Y) increases satisfaction in that domain (Domain Y) to compensate for the decrease in satisfaction in the original domain (Domain X).

There are two compensation strategies that have been well researched in the work-life balance literature: value-based compensation and behavior-based compensation. Value-based compensation occurs when an individual reduces the importance they ascribe to a less rewarding role within a life domain, thereby reducing the impact of domain dissatisfaction on overall life satisfaction. In contrast, behavior-based compensation involves the individual investing more time and energy in an alternative (more satisfying) role in another domain to generate domain satisfaction, which helps maintain overall life satisfaction.

Reducing Role Conflict

The compensatory model of life satisfaction does not account for role interactions across life domains. Remember the compensatory model and how it was described? The model is simple: it states that overall life satisfaction is the sum of satisfaction units across various life domains.

Consider the following scenario: Carol experiences a moderate level of satisfaction in both work life and family life (e.g., +3 units of satisfaction in each domain on an 11-point scale varying from +5 to -5). However, she experiences conflict between work and family roles (e.g., family demands interfere with work demands, and vice versa). In contrast, Ann experiences the same levels of domain satisfaction in both work life and family life (+3 units of satisfaction in each); however, Ann does not experience role conflict. The compensatory model of life satisfaction would predict that both individuals are likely to experience the same level of life satisfaction because both domains—work and family—are equally satisfied. However, life balance dictates that role conflict be accounted for in the way domain satisfaction contributes to life satisfaction. Considering role conflict, we conclude that Ann should experience higher life satisfaction than Carol.

What is role conflict? Social scientists traditionally define this concept as the situation in which role pressures associated with membership in one organization conflict with those stemming from membership in other groups. That is, the demands of one role make it more difficult to perform another role. In the context of work and family-related roles, this means that role demands in work and family life become incompatible to the extent that participation in one is made more difficult by participation in the other, and vice versa. What do we mean by role demand? Role demand involves the responsibilities, requirements, expectations, duties, and commitments associated with a designated role, such as family-, work-, friend-, church-, and neighbor-related roles.

One of the most significant aspects of role conflict is the difficulty in balancing behaviors across multiple roles due to the shackles imposed by traditional gender-role expectations. Especially in traditional cultures, women often feel — or are — responsible for everyone and everything in the family. Consider the following quote by a woman who participated in a study on role conflict: “Women don’t realize …. They’re so busy taking care of everybody else’s business and they’re forgetting their own business and peace of mind.”

Research has shown that role conflict across life domains (those considered important to an individual, such as work, family, and social life) adversely affects satisfaction within those domains and overall life satisfaction. A high level of psychological involvement in one role is usually associated with greater time and effort devoted to that role, thereby making it difficult to manage role demands in other life domains. Individuals experiencing role conflict across life domains are likely to experience stress, which in turn reduces overall life satisfaction. Why would they experience stress? To perform successfully in these conflicting roles, they must invest much more time and energy in them to maintain an acceptable level of life satisfaction. This allocation of more resources to maintain successful performance in conflicting social roles is most often accompanied by psychological stress commonly manifested in terms of general psychological strain, somatic/physical symptoms, depression, substance abuse, burnout, work-related stress, and family-related stress. Positive affectivity is negatively correlated with stress.

Consider the following study: a three-wave longitudinal survey spanning 1 year involving adult men and women. The study examined different forms of conflict between leisure and the life domains of work and family, and their relation to subjective well-being. The study's findings suggest that conflict across any of these three life domains is negatively associated with concurrent subjective well-being. That is, the study demonstrates that, as with work–family conflict, conflict with the leisure domain can significantly reduce subjective well-being.

The Principle of Role Conflict Reduction

Research has shown that a balanced life can be achieved when social roles across work and non-work domains are compatible and conflict-free. That is, stress management is typically recommended to address role conflict-related stress. Role conflict can take multiple forms, including time-, strain-, and behavior-based conflict. Time-based conflict refers to time pressures from one role that prevent individuals from meeting expectations in another role, or to a preoccupation with one role while physically attempting to fulfil another. For example, an individual may experience time-based conflict when the time devoted to work interferes with fulfilling family-related responsibilities. In other words, excessive time devoted to work-related tasks may make it difficult to carry out family responsibilities. Strain-based conflict occurs when tension, anxiety, and/or fatigue from one role affects performance in another role. For example, an individual may experience strain-based conflict when work responsibilities interfere with leisure, and vice versa. Strain may be manifested in the form of irritability and anxiety. Behavior-based conflict occurs when in-role behavior from one role is incompatible with behaviors expected in another role. For example, an employee schedules a meeting with a client at a time that conflicts with a family vacation trip. The scheduling of both events is behavior-based, and both actions conflict with each other.

In sum, individuals who successfully manage stress stemming from role conflict are likely to experience higher life satisfaction than those who do not. Specifically, role conflict causes significant stress, which takes a toll on life satisfaction — stress stemming from time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based role conflict. Stress management to reduce time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based conflict reduces domain dissatisfaction. In doing so, life satisfaction is maintained at an acceptable level of adaptation.

Stress Management Strategies

Stress management involves three distinct sets of techniques: techniques to reduce stress from (1) time-based conflict, (2) strain-based conflict, and (3) behavior-based conflict. See Table 1.

Table 1: Stress Management Strategies

Stress Management Strategy	Definition
Strategies to reduce time-based conflict	Planning and scheduling tasks and events without conflicts.
Strategies to reduce strain-based conflict	Engaging in regular exercise, participating in wellness programs, meditating, praying, seeking social support, challenging the belief system causing conflict, and cyberloafing.
Strategies to reduce behavior-based conflict	Identifying behaviors that may cause role conflict and taking action to refrain from them.

Stress Management Related to Time-Based Conflict

To reiterate, time-based conflict occurs when time demands associated with participation in one role interfere with participation in another role. That is, problems arising from scheduling time between work and family roles — or both — constitute work-family conflict. Research has shown that proper time management can reduce work-family conflict. Three clusters of time good management behaviors have been identified, namely (1) setting goals and priorities, (2) engaging in the mechanics of time management such as making lists and schedules, and (3) preferring organization.

Setting goals and priorities is an important aspect of time management. Individuals who are good at setting goals and priorities would endorse such statements as, “I set short-term goals for what I want to accomplish in a few days or weeks,” and “I set priorities to determine the order in which I will perform tasks each day.”

Engaging in the mechanics of time management involves, for example, a good system for recording appointments with reminders, as well as making a list of things to do each day and checking off each task as it is completed. Of course, an important aspect of scheduling is being cognizant of scheduling conflicts. That is, one should avoid scheduling projects and events that may conflict with one another.

Time management also involves a preference for organization. That is, carrying out tasks on time requires a minimal degree of organization. A messy, disorganized workplace and home may prevent people from completing tasks on their to-do lists on time. As such, organization is important in time management.

Another challenge in time management training is dealing with procrastination. It is common for individuals to be habitually behind schedule on their personal projects—psychologists refer to these people as “trait procrastinators.” These individuals procrastinate for various reasons. These can often include:

• Protection of self-esteem through self-handicapping (i.e., waiting to complete the project until very close to the deadline allows the individual to attribute poor performance on the project to “running out of time”; this attribution softens the blow of poor performance on one’s self-esteem);
• Avoidance of aversive tasks (i.e., procrastinating is a way to avoid engaging and completing tasks that the person perceives as unpleasant, undesirable, and perhaps painful);
• Demonstration of autonomy (i.e., procrastination signals noncompliance or at least resistance to conformity, which in turn signals that the person is in control of their own surroundings);
• Avoidance of anxiety (i.e., procrastinating allows the person to put off the task in question to avoid the anxiety associated with the possibility of poor task performance);
• Response to their perfectionist tendencies (i.e., procrastinating is a way to cope with perfectionism; perfectionists anticipate “less than perfect” performance due to their high standards; as such, they procrastinate to avoid having to deal with the anxiety over the “less-than-perfect” performance); and
• Lack self-regulation (i.e., some people procrastinate because they are not disciplined enough to monitor time and abide by a schedule).

A literature review categorized procrastination interventions into three programs: training self-regulatory skills, building self-efficacy, and organizing social support. The goal of training in self-regulatory skills is to establish good work habits that ultimately serve to prevent procrastination. The training techniques involve defining goals, setting deadlines, allocating time slots, monitoring progress, and avoiding distractions. Building self-efficacy involves changing thinking patterns that lead to procrastination—replacing negative, unproductive thoughts with positive, productive ones. Organizing social support involves sharing problems arising from procrastination with others. The support group helps address those problems by working collectively to solve them. The support group also helps recruit others to monitor procrastinators, remind them of impending deadlines, and encourage the execution of the planned behavior. The support group also helps to reduce stress and anxiety related to procrastination.

Stress Management Related to Strain-Based Conflict

Examples of stress management techniques to reduce strain-based conflict include activities that improve mental and physical health, such as breathing exercises, meditation, physical exercise, and social support, among others. Research has shown that leaders who exercise regularly have greater stamina and mental focus than those who do not exercise or exercise less regularly. Some research has shown that the unwillingness to exercise may be a consequence of role conflict — the conflict between work and family roles — which leaves the individual with insufficient time or energy. In contrast, research has also shown that those who exercise report less work-family conflict. Consider the following study. The study involved a sample of 476 working adults to examine the relationship between exercise and work-family conflict. Their study demonstrated that physical exercise (planned, structured, repetitive, and purposeful physical activity) indirectly affects work-family conflict by increasing self-efficacy in managing it and decreasing psychological strain. That is, the study findings suggest that physical exercise heightens one’s belief that they can manage their work and family lives (i.e., self-efficacy), and, as such, they can better manage work-family conflict cognitively.

Wellness programs have become fashionable in the corporate world, and physical fitness is now an entrenched and well-established part of the mix alongside other, more traditional wellness programs. Consider the following companies as an example. Both Zappos.com and Google were named in Fortune’s “100 Best Companies to Work For.” Among other perks, both companies offer on-site fitness programs (e.g., yoga classes). Considerable evidence shows that wellness programs reduce absenteeism and health insurance premiums, and increase job satisfaction, employee morale, and employee retention.

How about meditation? Consider the following study. The study examined the effectiveness of a brief mindfulness-based training intervention that involved a one-hour workshop followed by 13 days of behavioral self-monitoring. The goal of the study was to reduce work–family conflict, and the intervention was successful. Specifically, participants in the intervention experienced greater mindfulness and less work-to-family and family-to-work conflict than those who did not participate.

Praying can be considered a form of meditation. A study conducted among female Muslim academicians in Malaysia found that many participants believed that turning to religion in times of need helps manage their stress. They asserted that they turn to “Allah” to help solve problems related to family, work, and other matters. From this, it is clear that praying can be an effective strategy for managing the high demands of multiple roles. Consider the following quotation from one of the study participants:

When I face any conflict, I have one strategy for coping: I turn to Allah, because I believe only Allah can help me solve my problem. I also pray Tahajjud (night prayers), make dua (supplications) because only Allah knows everything about me, my family, and my husband. He is the only One who can resolve our problem.

Resources, such as social support, can also reduce work-family conflict and minimize the detrimental effects of role conflict on health and well-being. Social support has been proven to reduce psychological strain, increase job and family satisfaction, and reduce work–family conflict. The converse is also true—lack of social support can exacerbate work-family conflict, which in turn increases psychological strain and reduces satisfaction in both work and family life. Social support is usually provided by a significant other or another substantial family member. A supportive partner is usually an important resource for reducing strains in the family domain and alleviating family-to-work conflict. Given that family distress is associated with family-to-work conflict, a supportive partner acts as a buffer to reduce family distress. Consider the same study on Malaysian academics. In addition to using religion as a coping strategy to deal with work-family conflict, the women also identified social support as a key strategy to deal with the demands involved with multiple roles.

Yet another strategy to reduce role conflict is to challenge the belief system that causes it. Most belief systems are indoctrinated in you from childhood. Especially prevalent and pervasive is the belief system surrounding sex and gender roles. Men are often taught to be the family's breadwinners. They need to work hard to bring in financial resources to support their family's needs. In contrast, many women are told they are responsible for the family's daily needs at home. They are supposed to feed the family, clean the house, play nurse, and play hostess for social events, among other stereotypical tasks. Challenging these gender role expectations is an effective way to reduce role conflict. It is more acceptable now than ever before for women to challenge gender role norms. Traditional concepts of masculinity and femininity have been obfuscated, and individuals can now choose to engage in behaviors without regard to gender role expectations, with less fear of being ostracized. A woman may challenge the norm by saying something to this effect:

Just because I am a woman, I am expected to fix dinner and be the primary caregiver; I will not accept that. This is too old-fashioned; it is too antiquated; we live in a different era; both men and women must share responsibilities in the home and outside the home equally.

An interesting coping strategy that many people use at work to reduce stress is “cyberloafing.” Cyberloafing refers to “any voluntary act of employees using their companies’ internet access during office hours to surf non-work-related websites for non-work purposes. Although cyberloafing has a negative connotation, researchers have found that it can have positive effects on employees. Their study findings revealed that cyberloafing

• makes work more interesting,
• provides cognitive support to deal with work and nonwork-related problems,
• makes employees more well-versed and interesting, allows relief from work,
• motivates employees to perform better, and
• allows employees to take an innocuous break from a stressful environment.

Stress Management Related to Behavior-Based Conflict

An example of a stress management technique that can help reduce behavior-based conflict is to become more aware of behaviors that may cause role conflict and take action to refrain from them.

We need to realize that we all engage in a multitude of both good and bad behaviors daily. Some of these behaviors may conflict with one another, leading us to feel more satisfied in one domain while depriving us of satisfaction in another. Take the simple example of working on a project through lunch. You usually eat a healthy lunch made up of a good tuna salad with soup. Working through lunch forces you to snack on candy and other junk food instead. Yet working through lunch may have helped complete a project on time. This means that this behavior enhanced role performance in the work domain, contributing to increased satisfaction in work life. However, snacking on junk food made you gain an extra few pounds, which made you feel unhappy about your weight gain. Furthermore, you are diabetic, which means that you need to regulate your food intake, especially foods with high sugar and salt content. As such, you feel bad about your health. One avenue for reducing stress related to behavior-based conflict is to become cognizant of behaviors that may lead to satisfaction in one domain while causing dissatisfaction in another.

Another way to reduce stress arising from behavior-based conflict is to learn to say no to demands so you can take care of yourself. Consider the following quote from another participant in the Malaysian academic study.

Addictive relationships are not only with partners but with kids. It’s waking me up. Now, I’m kicking ass. A few weeks ago, my brother called me for a ride, and I said, “No. I live on the north side, and you want me to come all the way over to the south side? No.” My mom gets on the phone, “Well, are you taking Steve?” “No,” [I said]. “Did you tell him?” “Yes, I did.” [I said]. That’s another thing; you don’t tell a man no when it’s your brother or your son, or what, and they are always supposed to come first. That’s the way I was always taught.

Lessons Learned

Role conflict refers to a demand in one role in a particular life domain that leads to behavior to meet that role demand in ways that interfere with meeting role demands in other life domains. In the context of work and family-related roles, this means that role responsibilities in work and family life become incompatible to the extent that participation in one makes participation in the other more difficult, and vice versa.

Individuals who successfully manage stress stemming from role conflict are likely to experience higher life satisfaction than those who do not. Specifically, role conflict causes significant stress, which negatively impacts life satisfaction — stress stemming from time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based role conflict. Stress management to reduce time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based conflict reduces domain dissatisfaction. In doing so, life satisfaction is maintained at an acceptable level of adaptation.

Strategies to reduce time-based conflict involve planning and scheduling tasks and events so they do not overlap, and addressing procrastination. Strategies to reduce strain-based conflict include engaging in regular exercise, participating in wellness programs, practicing meditation, praying, seeking social support, challenging established beliefs, and engaging in cyberloafing. Strategies to reduce behavior-based conflict involve identifying behaviors that may cause role conflict and taking steps to avoid them.

Using Skills, Experiences, and Resources in One Role for Other Roles

Consider the following scenario. A worker, let’s call him Henry, experiences an imbalance in domain satisfaction between work and family life. That is, Henry’s satisfaction at work is +4 units on an 11-point scale ranging from -5 (very dissatisfied) to +5 (very satisfied). Recently, his satisfaction with family life was +3, but has now plummeted to -2 (a moderate degree of dissatisfaction). That is, his satisfaction with family life decreased significantly, but his satisfaction with work remained constant. He is experiencing this diminished satisfaction in family life due to conflict with his adolescent children. Henry recalls using conflict-resolution strategies at work that successfully resolved conflicts with members of their project team. He applies the same conflict-resolution strategies at home to address family conflicts, with positive results. Doing so changed satisfaction in family life from -2 to +3. The increase in family life satisfaction ultimately helped maintain an acceptable level of overall life satisfaction.

There are situations in which people use skills, experiences, and resources in one role to enhance balanced satisfaction across life domains. In other words, resources in one role can enhance performance and satisfaction in another — a phenomenon known as role enrichment. For example, work-to-family enrichment occurs when work experiences or knowledge increase satisfaction in family life, and similarly, family-to-work enrichment occurs when family experiences or knowledge contribute to heightened satisfaction in work life. Doing so helps people enhance domain satisfaction. That is, learning that occurs in one life domain is readily transferred to other domains, enabling the individual to achieve greater satisfaction across domains through role engagement and goal attainment.

The Principle of Role Enrichment

Research has documented the effect of role enrichment on overall life satisfaction when the two roles are integrated, when the skills and resource requirements are similar, or when role performance in one life domain becomes increasingly interdependent with another. Elevated levels of role enrichment improve role performance in both work and nonwork domains, which, in turn, contribute to balanced satisfaction across domains. That is, skills, psychological resources, and material resources developed in one life domain can be applied to roles in other domains, enhancing performance in those domains. Furthermore, individuals with high role enrichment are less likely to experience stress and anxiety in response to increased role demands. Such individuals apply their skills and resources across social roles, producing more positive outcomes — less psychological distress and anxiety in performing multiple roles and a heightened sense of self-efficacy in those roles.

Role enrichment may involve a variety of work and nonwork domains. To appreciate the concept of role enrichment, let’s examine how social scientists measure the concept. Here is an example metric from the work-life balance research literature on work-to-family and family-to-work facilitation, known as the “Work–Family Facilitation” scale. A sample work-to-family facilitation item is “Because of my work, I am more able to put home-related matters into perspective,” and a sample family-to-work facilitation item is “Because of my home life, I am more able to put work-related problems aside.”

How does role enrichment improve life balance and enhance overall life satisfaction? A multitude of studies examine how role enrichment—as well as other mechanisms such as “resource enrichment,” “positive spillover,” “role facilitation,” and “role enhancement”—improves life satisfaction. Work-life balance researchers suggest that positive experiences in one role can lead to positive experiences in another through at least one mechanism. Specifically, participation in certain roles builds skills and resources that can be applied to other roles. Resources generated within a specific role are used to enhance that role's performance. Role performance leads to increased positive affect in that role. Increased positive affect in one role may lead to improved performance in another role, which in turn increases positive affect in the original role. As such, increased positive affect in both roles leads to increased life satisfaction. For example, management skills learned in communicating with workers are applied to enhance job performance, leading to increased job satisfaction. Communication skills learned at work for communicating with subordinates are applied to enhance job performance. Those same skills help foster efficient, open communication at home, leading to fewer conflicts and greater family satisfaction. Increased satisfaction in work and family life then contributes to greater overall life satisfaction.

We can succinctly capture the preceding discussion as follows: Individuals who use their skills, experiences, and resources in one role for other roles across life domains are likely to experience greater domain satisfaction (in dissatisfied domains) than those who do not. That is, they use skills, experiences, and resources in one domain to increase satisfaction in another domain (or mitigate decreases in satisfaction there), thereby increasing (or preserving) overall life satisfaction.

Role Enrichment Strategies

There are at least four strategies that characterize role enrichment. These are (1) skills, (2) perspectives, (3) flexibility, and (4) resources – physical, psychological, social, and material. See Table 1.

Table 1: Role Enrichment Strategies

Role Enrichment Strategy	Definition
Skills	The skills (people skills, time management skills, multitasking skills, etc.) often used in one domain to improve role performance can also enhance performance and increase satisfaction in another domain.
Perspectives	Adopting a perspective (understanding personality differences, valuing cultural diversity, appreciating another person’s position on issues, valuing trust, etc.) that is often used in one domain to improve role performance can also be applied to another domain to enhance role performance and increase satisfaction.
Flexibility	Applying rules of flexibility (i.e., discretion to determine the timing, pace, and location at which role demands are met), often used in one domain to improve role performance, can also improve role performance and increase satisfaction in another domain.
Resources	Applying resources (i.e., psychological, physical, social, and material) that are often used in one domain to improve role performance can also enhance performance and increase satisfaction in another domain.

Skills

Skills refer to a broad set of task-related cognitive abilities, including — but not limited to — people skills, coping skills, multi-tasking skills, knowledge, and wisdom derived from past experiences in specific roles. These skills can be generalized and applied across various roles in different life domains. Those skills that have proven successful in meeting role demand in one domain are used in another domain to meet role demand there. Doing so improves role performance in the other domain, thereby increasing satisfaction in that domain. For example, a salesperson has built strong people skills over the years in their line of work: listening, communicating, negotiating, and persuading retail customers. These people skills are then applied in family life by improving listening, communication, negotiation, and persuasion with other family members. Improvements in family life lead to greater satisfaction, which in turn contributes to greater overall life satisfaction.

Perspectives

Perspectives involve ways of perceiving situations, such as understanding personality differences, valuing cultural diversity, adopting another person’s perspective to better understand and appreciate their position, and valuing trust — understanding that we can all do better by trusting others and institutions. Adopting a particular perspective, often used in one domain and proven successful in meeting role demand and improving role performance, can be applied in another domain to do the same—improve role performance and increase satisfaction. For example, a manager learns that trusting their subordinates by allowing them to participate in decision-making, delegating authority, and encouraging them to do the job their own way can also be applied to their children. By allowing them to choose which chores they want to do and to do them in the way they see fit, rather than showing a lack of trust by micromanaging. As such, adopting an accountability-focused approach to workplace management can also yield positive results in family life, which, in turn, should increase personal happiness.

Flexibility

Flexibility refers to the discretion to determine the timing, pace, and location at which role demand is met. This has often been recognized in the work-family literature as a means of achieving work-life balance. Applying rules of flexibility often used in one domain (rules that produced rewarding experiences in that domain) to another domain can achieve the same, improving role performance and increasing satisfaction. Consider the same manager from the previous example. They learn that workplace flexibility can lead to better job performance. That is, allowing subordinates to choose their job parameters can make them more productive by enabling them to decide when, where, and how quickly to work on a given task. The same flexibility principle can enhance household work—household chores such as cleaning, cooking, shopping, chauffeuring, entertaining, and so on. Allow family members more flexibility in completing household chores. Doing so could ensure that household chores are completed more effectively and, in turn, contribute to family satisfaction.

Resources

People use various resources to enhance performance in specific roles, including psychological, physical, social, and material resources. One can use similar resources applied in the context of a specific role in a given domain to another role in another domain — resources that led to successful performance in the original role. Doing so increases satisfaction in the other domain. Psychological resources may involve cognitive and emotional strengths such as self-efficacy, self-esteem, optimism, and hope. Physical resources involve physical health and capacity. Social resources involve the goodwill inherent in social relationships. Material resources include things like money and gifts.

Consider the latter, material resources. A manager finds that Christmas bonuses for employees build overall trust and goodwill in the company, which, in turn, boosts employee productivity and job satisfaction. Using the same concept, the manager gives Christmas gifts to their significant other and children, thereby enhancing goodwill and morale within the family.

Lessons Learned

This module focused on role-enrichment strategies designed to enhance work-life balance. Role enrichment strategies involve using skills, experiences, and resources (proven successful in meeting demand in one role) to meet demand in another role, thereby increasing satisfaction in that life domain. Doing so serves to maintain an acceptable level of overall life satisfaction.

There are at least four strategies that characterize role enrichment. These are (1) skills, (2) perspectives, (3) flexibility, and (4) resources—physical, psychological, social, and material. With respect to the skills role-enrichment strategy, skills (people skills, coping skills, multitasking skills, etc.) often used in one domain to improve role performance can also be applied to enhance role performance and increase satisfaction in another domain. The perspectives strategy calls for adopting a similar perspective across roles in different life domains — such as understanding personality differences, valuing cultural diversity, appreciating another person’s position on issues, and valuing trust. That is, a perspective adopted in a role in a specific life domain that led to successful role performance in that domain could also be adopted to facilitate role performance in another domain. The flexibility strategy is somewhat akin to the perspectives strategy. Applying rules of flexibility (i.e., discretion to determine the timing, pace, and location at which role demands are met) that led to improvements in role performance can also be implemented in another domain. The net result is increased satisfaction in the other domain, which, in turn, contributes to overall life satisfaction. With respect to the resources strategy, the idea is that applying resources (i.e., psychological, physical, social, and material) used in one domain to improve role performance can also be applied to improve role performance in another domain. Doing so increases satisfaction in the other domain.