It Was the Best of Times; It Was the Worst of Times

Abstract

The importance of work–life balance has increased dramatically in recent years. Hyperconnected employees are struggling to balance the “spillover” between internal work and external life demands. We questioned whether there was a difference in organizationally supported work–life balance at Fortune Magazine’s “Best Places to Work For” versus Wall St. 24/7’s “Worst Places to Work.” We analyzed 1,100 unsolicited, open-ended employee reviews from a major career web site and conducted a contextual analysis of the differences between the “best” and “worst” places to work. Our findings show clear differences in the time benefits offered and governance structures used to support these benefits. Our findings also reveal that employees today are not seeking “balance.” Instead, they are seeking “work–life flexibility,” a new, complex way of looking at the employee today. Findings are discussed and implications for work–life flexibility are provided.