{"id":307878,"date":"2025-10-16T11:09:12","date_gmt":"2025-10-16T11:09:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/307878\/"},"modified":"2025-10-16T11:09:12","modified_gmt":"2025-10-16T11:09:12","slug":"why-flexible-work-arrangements-arent-always-inclusive","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/307878\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Flexible Work Arrangements Aren\u2019t Always Inclusive"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Dr Jonathan E. Booth<\/a>, Associate Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Human Resource Management at the Department of Management, LSE, and Daniela Lup<\/a>, Senior Visiting Fellow at LSE and Professor of Work and Human Relations at ESCP Business School.<\/p>\n

\"Disabled<\/p>\n

Smart disabled coder sitting in wheelchair and using computers while working from home<\/p>\n

getty<\/p>\n

Flexible work promises higher employee productivity, wellbeing, and inclusion. But does flexibility really deliver on all those promises? Our new research<\/a>, published in the British Journal of Industrial Relations, shows that the story is more complicated, particularly for employees with disabilities.<\/p>\n

In our research, we aimed to answer concrete dilemmas managers have regarding what types of flexibility have the highest positive impact and how each type affects employees with and without disabilities. Using large data from the European Working Conditions Survey<\/a> (2015), we analyzed four types of discretionary work arrangements: <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Work discretion<\/strong> \u2013 autonomy over how tasks are performed.<\/li>\n
  2. Scheduling discretion<\/strong> \u2013 flexibility in work hours.<\/li>\n
  3. Part-time work<\/strong> \u2013 reduced hours or job-sharing.<\/li>\n
  4. Homeworking<\/strong> \u2013 frequency of remote work from home.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Our goal was to understand how each of these arrangements impacts employees with and without disabilities across key outcomes such as job satisfaction, motivation, stress, work-life balance, and perceived fairness.<\/p>\n

    The findings: not all discretionary work arrangements are created equal, and some may unintentionally undermine inclusion.<\/p>\n

    The Good News: Autonomy and Scheduling Flexibility<\/p>\n

    There is good news for certain types of flexibility arrangements. Our findings show that work and scheduling discretion were powerful tools for inclusion. Employees with disabilities reported significantly higher levels of job satisfaction, motivation, and engagement when they had control over how and when they worked. These arrangements also reduced stress and improved work-life balance for disabled employees more than for others.<\/p>\n

    Why is that? Conservation of Resources Theory, on which we rely in our study, suggests that individuals with fewer resources, such as those facing health-related challenges, benefit more from resource gains. In this case, autonomy and flexibility act as valuable resources that help employees manage their work in ways that suit their needs.<\/p>\n

    The Mixed Bag: Part-Time Work<\/p>\n

    Part-time work was a double-edged sword. On one hand, it provided access to employment and skill-building opportunities for employees with disabilities. On the other, it came with trade-offs: reduced recognition, lower perceived fairness, and diminished social capital. Interestingly, non-disabled employees experienced more negative effects from part-time arrangements, possibly due to stigma or assumptions about commitment.<\/p>\n

    The Red Flag: Homeworking<\/p>\n

    Perhaps our most surprising finding was the negative impact of homeworking. While in our work with managers, we heard that remote work has been the preferred solution, our results show that extensive homeworking can be isolating and stressful for employees with disabilities. These employees reported lower job satisfaction, reduced motivation, and increased work-life interference when working from home.<\/p>\n

    The reason? We argue that the negative effects are the outcome of resource loss, specifically access to casual information sharing, mentoring and informal support networks that are harder to replicate virtually. For disabled employees, these resources are often critical to success and inclusion.<\/p>\n

    What Should Employers Do?<\/p>\n

    The implications for employers are clear: flexibility must be intentional and inclusive. Below we suggest five practical solutions:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Prioritise autonomy and flexible schedules<\/strong>
      Give all employees control over how they complete tasks and when they work. Even a little flexibility in terms of starting and finishing time or the ability to take an hour off is a tremendous resource. This boosts engagement and reduces stress, especially for those managing health conditions. <\/li>\n
    2. Rethink remote work<\/strong>
      Don\u2019t assume homeworking is universally beneficial. Homeworking is beneficial only when managers provide structured support, regular check-ins, and access to mentoring to prevent isolation.<\/li>\n
    3. Design inclusive part-time roles<\/strong>
      Ensure part-time employees are included in team activities, have access to development opportunities, and are not penalised in performance evaluations.<\/li>\n
    4. Tailor arrangements to individual needs<\/strong>
      Flexibility should not be one-size-fits-all. Engage employees in conversations about what works for them and offer a menu of options.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      While discretionary work arrangements can be powerful tools for supporting employees with disabilities, they must be thoughtfully designed and implemented. We hope that our research can offer employers practical suggestion regarding how to use these tools. Employers who get it right won\u2019t just improve wellbeing\u2014they\u2019ll unlock the full potential of a diverse workforce. <\/p>\n

      Follow LSE\u2019s Department of Management on LinkedIn<\/a>. Check out our website<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"By Dr Jonathan E. Booth, Associate Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Human Resource Management at the Department of…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":307879,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[64,9157,7931,12514,6361,93737,56940,420,3457,155861,3628,155862,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-307878","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-jobs","8":"tag-business","9":"tag-dei","10":"tag-disability","11":"tag-diversity","12":"tag-human-resources","13":"tag-inclusion","14":"tag-inclusivity","15":"tag-jobs","16":"tag-leadership","17":"tag-lse","18":"tag-management","19":"tag-part-time","20":"tag-united-states","21":"tag-unitedstates","22":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115383538174497373","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/307878","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=307878"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/307878\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/307879"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=307878"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=307878"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=307878"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}