A Meta‐Analysis of Antecedents and Outcomes of Flexible Working Arrangements
基于113项研究、88618名参与者的元分析，系统梳理了弹性工作安排的前因（如管理职位、自我效能、任务依赖性）和后果（如工作满意度、组织承诺、工作家庭平衡），发现同时提供时间与地点弹性比单一弹性更有利，且弹性安排的可用性比实际使用更能带来积极效果。
ABSTRACT Flexible working arrangements (FWAs) are increasingly available and used across diverse settings, particularly following the COVID‐19 pandemic. Yet, knowledge of the antecedents and outcomes of FWAs is incomplete and inconclusive. It remains unclear what factors facilitate the perceived availability and use of FWAs, and under what conditions FWAs are most beneficial, including (1) whether flexibility in work schedule (flextime), work location (flexplace) or both (flextime + place) is most beneficial, and (2) whether employees must use FWAs to reap their benefits. To address these gaps, we conduct a comprehensive meta‐analysis to examine theoretically derived antecedents and outcomes of FWAs. We also examine whether different types of FWAs—flextime versus flexplace versus flextime + place, and FWA availability versus FWA use—moderate the relationships between FWAs and outcomes. Meta‐analytic results based on 113 studies with 88 618 participants identify a host of important antecedences of FWAs, such as managerial status, self‐efficacy, and task interdependency. Consistent with social exchange theory, Conservation of Resources theory and boundary theory, FWAs were significantly associated with beneficial outcomes, such as greater job satisfaction, organisational commitment, job autonomy, life satisfaction, better work‐family interface and family satisfaction. Significant moderation indicate that more beneficial employee outcomes were associated with (1) having both flextime and flexplace compared to flextime or flexplace alone, (2) flextime compared to flexplace and (3) the availability compared to use of FWAs. These results provide a comprehensive, systematic understanding of the personal, work‐related, and familial antecedents and outcomes associated with different types of FWAs.