When home knocks on remote work: family interruptions, polychronicity and temporal leadership in shaping work-life balance
Mei‐Ling Wang et al.
Abstract
Purpose This study analyzes how family-sourced work interruptions (FSWI) influence employees' work-life balance (WLB) in remote work environments, highlighting the interactive roles of polychronicity and temporal leadership as key boundary conditions. Design/methodology/approach A two-stage field survey was conducted among 481 knowledge workers in a voluntary hybrid work arrangement. At Time 1, participants reported FSWI, polychronicity, and temporal leadership; at Time 2, one month later, WLB was measured. The analyses applied a three-way interaction framework to evaluate the conditional effects. Findings Our findings revealed a negative association between FSWI and WLB. The magnitude of this effect was weaker for employees with high polychronicity, reflecting their greater capacity to manage interruptions. Moreover, a significant three-way interaction revealed a compensatory pattern: high temporal leadership buffered the impact of FSWI on employees with low polychronicity. In contrast, low temporal leadership was more beneficial for those with high polychronicity. Originality/value This study addresses a gap in the literature by directly linking FSWI to WLB in remote contexts and conceptualizing FSWI as a persistent structural stressor. It further highlights polychronicity as a critical personal resource and advances a compensatory resource perspective on temporal leadership, clarifying when leader-provided structures strengthen or weaken employee well-being. In doing so, the study extends boundary theory and provides actionable guidance for managers to tailor leadership practices to the temporal orientations of remote workers.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.