Various studies of organisational flexibility have looked at the
links between numerical and functional flexibility. They have tried to
explain how organisations are able to obtain these concurrently. This
can lead to competitive advantage (Tarique and Schuler, 2008). According
to Kalleberg (2001), this link is achieved using the core--periphery
model. The core is associated with more regular workers having good
employment conditions. The periphery consists of those having a more
casual employment relationship.
More specifically, according to Kalleberg (2001, p.2) the
literature presents two different perspectives on the labour market: (a)
"improving workers ability to carry out a variety of jobs and to
take part in decision making, and (b) cutting costs by constraining
workers' involvement in the establishment". These two
strategies have been called by a variety of names e.g. functional versus
numerical flexibility (Atkinson, 1984a). In this paper I propose to
discuss the merits and shortcomings of the core periphery model and to
test this model in the hospitality industry.
2. ATKINSON'S FLEXIBLE FIRM
The core-periphery arguments trace their academic roots to the idea
of safeguarding the resources and competences of an establishment. This
is perceived to be central to its competitiveness. There is a call for
adequate flexibility strategies for both employers and employees
(Kerkhofs et al., 2008). Atkinson proposed a model of the flexible firm.
In the flexible firm model flexibility is defined as functional,
numerical and financial flexibility (Atkinson, 1984b).
Functional flexibility is concerned with the ability of employees
to handle different tasks and move between jobs, i.e. multi-skilling.
This approach enables employers to match changing workloads, production
methods and/or technology. Numerical flexibility refers to the power to
adjust the number of workers or the number of hours worked, in response
to changes in demand. Financial flexibility refers to a firm's
capability to change employment costs in response to supply and demand
in the external labour market. This facilitates the objectives of
functional and numerical flexibility. Furthermore, it involves a move
away from standardised pay structures. It is directed towards more
individualised systems dependent upon performance.
In addition, Atkinson proposes an ideal model of the fully flexible
firm (cf. Figure 1, 1984b). Such a firm would employ a numerically fixed
core group of employees. The core would consist of full-time employees
who carry out the key activities of the firm. Surrounding the core
employees are the peripheral groups. The latter insulate the core from
the effects of changes in demand. Peripheral group one employees have
permanent contracts. However, they have few career opportunities and
less job security. Peripheral group two employees are more numerically
flexible. They are mainly part-timers, job sharers or employees on
short-term contracts. These two peripheral groups are in their turn
surrounded by external or distanced groups. They are not directly
employed by the company and include sub contractors, self-employed
workers, temporary staff agencies and outsourcing. According to Bryson
and Blackwell (2006) a rise in numerical flexibility through temporary
contracts is unsatisfactory due to inconsistencies and lack of stability
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
This model offered management and government policy makers a
framework for identifying the main practices for development. The aim
would be to obtain both functional and numerical flexibility. It
suggested that they should seek to establish long-term employment with
the core regular permanent workers. These are highly trained, skilled
and committed to the organisation. At the same time, they externalise
other activities and /or persons by means of transactional contracts.
This approach is supposed to achieve cost effectiveness. The numerically
flexible, nonstandard peripheral workers are used to protect the regular
core labour force from changes in demand (Kalleberg, 2001; Johnson,
2.1 CORE-PERIPHERY MODEL (Figure 1)
The flexible firm represents the structure towards which Atkinson
believes UK firms are moving.
In summary, the author has identified the main features of
Atkinson's flexible firm i.e. functional and numerical flexibility.
Most commentators still broadly perceive labour utilisation in
core-periphery terms. The core contains the more regular workers, with
relatively favourable conditions of employment. The periphery group has
a more casual employment relationship. The debate raises the following
question: Is the core-periphery model a relevant model for today's
workplace? The next section will examine in more detail the various
2.2 CRITICISMS OF THE FLEXIBLE FIRM
While the framework of the flexible firm has many merits,
criticisms have also been documented. The criticisms of the model focus
mainly on three aspects (Legge, 1995, p. 153)
* "Sloppiness in conceptual specification
* Lack of unequivocal empirical support for the model as
* The covert ideological agenda embodied in the model as
The concept of core and peripheral workers has been interpreted by
managers in different ways. Attempts to equate the core with skilled,
flexible workers and the periphery with unskilled, inflexible workers
have been criticized as too simplistic. Furthermore, there is the
additional complication of dual status. This occurs when a worker may
simultaneously be a core and a peripheral worker, depending on the point
of reference. The ambiguity inherent in the distinctions between core
and peripheral workers can also lead to the apparent contradiction of
temporary work lasting longer than permanent work (Pollert, 1988, 1991;
Firstly, the model's assumption of homogeneity within the core
group and within the peripheral group is not an accurate reflection of
reality. It is also difficult to analyse the make-up of the core. Some
writers have discussed a variety of work arrangements that comprise the
periphery, but have tended to treat the core as a fairly homogenous
group. Moreover, there is a counter argument to this. To view core and
peripheral workers as occupying positions in separate parts of the
organisation is to neglect considering ways in which these groups of
workers may work together within the same departments. They may even
perform the same jobs within an organisation (Atkinson, 1984a,b;
Pollert, 1991; Kalleberg, 2001).
Secondly, the relationship between the core and periphery sector(s)
is more elaborate than is generally assumed by the core-periphery model.
It may not always be the case, for example, that workers in the
periphery are used to protect the core. In addition, these two groups of
employees may be related in other ways, such as recruitment and
selection of temporary agency staff for permanent positions (Kalleberg,
Also, it is questionable whether the flexible firm model shows both
the core and periphery labor force as separate employment categories.
Some writers have found that in the hospitality industry, part-time and
temporary staff are extensively used to provide essential core services.
There is some evidence from the British retailing and hospitality
industry that part-time, temporary and casual staff make up the core
rather than the periphery. They are essential to the organization.
Others have found that the use of temporary workers is more likely to
occur where demand is predictable. Also, overtime is the preferred
method to achieve temporary flexibility where demand is unpredictable.
Thus temporary workers are not replacing standard workers. On the other
hand, there is evidence that suggests that employers and many trade
unionists regard part-time workers as marginal. Part-time and temporary
employees are also treated as distinct labor force segments. Other
studies show that temporary work appears to be a screening procedure to
recruit permanent staff rather than a strategy to increase a periphery.
Furthermore, there is evidence that the chief reason for using
self-employed workers is for specialist skills which are unavailable in
the core work-force. It is not to provide numerical flexibility
(Pollert, 1988; Legge, 1995; Buultjens and Luckie, 1997).
On a more optimistic note, there are now opportunities for skilled,
flexible workers to improve core production and to be in a better core
position in the work-force. This is in contrast to Braverman's
(1974) idea of a general downgrading of the labour process under
capitalism. In brief, functional flexibility may not always be used to
complement the quality of work. Neither can numerical flexibility be
viewed as a low-cost approach. Both methods can be used within the same
Many authors disagree with Atkinson's idea of the flexible
firm. Although there has been a trend towards more flexible working
arrangements, there is no clear demonstration of a major change in
employment style (Marginson et al., 1988, Morley et al., 1995). In
addition, Pollert has questioned the trend towards increased use of
peripheral workers. Pollert's arguments are supported by MacInnes
(1988) who claims that the flexible firm lacks cohesion. It has not been
effective in practice. In contrast, this conclusion by MacInnes (1988)
was challenged by Geary (1992). In his study of employment flexibility
in American Electronic Plants, it was found that the flexible firm did
have a substantial impact on industrial relations. In one of the plants,
Astra, seventy per cent of the employees were temporary in keeping with
Atkinson's second peripheral group. Geary also found evidence to
suggest that peripheral workers were subject to minimised labour costs.
In contrast, core workers were treated to benefits, e.g. cafeteria
vouchers, to win motivation and commitment (Geary, 1992).
Various studies that have focused on the relationship between
functional and numerical flexibility in organizations, have tended to
view this interrelationship mainly in terms of a relatively simple
core-periphery model (e.g. Atkinson, 1984a,b; Olmsted and Smyth, 1989).
The debate here has focused mainly on whether it is an accurate
representation of the organization of manpower by employers. However, it
could be argued that this approach ignores different ways in which the
two flexible forms of work organization may be related. Also, employers
have created various practices in order to balance the advantages and
disadvantages associated with both forms (Kalleberg, 2001). Similarly,
another study has found that the core-periphery contrast is not refined
enough as a workable model (Hunter et al., 1993). Internal labor markets
are changing as a result of subcontracting, contingent work, discretion
in employment decisions regarding hiring and firing and increased
autonomy in work groups (Cappelli, 1995). He found that these
market-mediated arrangements did not correspond to the core-periphery
model in Britain. However, these studies have weaknesses where the
information about employees comes from employers, with the main focus
being on the employer perspective (Hunter et al., 1993; Walsh and Deery,
1999). Furthermore, a study conducted in Ireland on the top trading and
non-trading companies has shown that there is a move towards more
flexible work practices. However, the evidence does not support the
flexible firm thesis (Morley et al., 1995).
Also, Pollert (1991, p. 31) stated that the flexibility debate
In summary, empirical research consistently concludes that the
flexible firm model is insufficient to explain the changes observed in
organisations. The theoretical distinction made between core and
peripheral workers appears to be unsupported in a majority of cases.
However, others argue that the lack of a devised and written strategy in
the upper strata of the firm is not conclusive proof that strategic
change does not exist. Small changes are occurring in various flexible
areas. This adds up to a considerable driving force (Proctor et al.,
3. CONTEXT OF STUDY
The evidence points to a lack of service-based empirical research
(Lucas, 1996; Hoque, 2000; Illeris, 2002). Many of the flexibility
debates of the 1980s focused on manufacturing and failed to give due
importance to the service sector. Furthermore, this approach does not
take into account the fact that the hospitality industry developed these
working practices during the 1960s and 1970s (Baggauley, 1990).
The importance of services, and the extent to which that importance
has increased, is yet to be reflected within empirical research, despite
the fact that it is sections of the services sector that will shed the
greatest light on the future employment relationship (Hoque, 2000, p.2).
Further, Van Scotter and Culligan (2003) have pointed to the need
for more hospitality research.
In addition, there is a need to research the small establishment as
Irish industry is mainly made up of small businesses (Okumus, 2002).
Also, the literature highlighted a lack of human resource research in
Ireland and insufficient research in the non-unionized sector (Hoque,
2000; Bird et al., 2002).
Ireland has over sixty per cent of the labour force is employed in
services and the vast majority of this employment is full-time.
Furthermore, part-time employment in the services sector is
significantly lower in Ireland, than in either the Netherlands or the UK
(Humphreys et al., 2000). In the economy in general, tourism is
responsible for the employment of about one in twelve of the
nonagricultural workforce and approximately one tenth of those engaged
in the service sector (Irish Hotel Federation, 2001).
3.1. DATA SET
The author's view was that a structured direct survey would be
most appropriate in order to provide broad coverage of an integrated
study of work flexibility. The author decided to conduct a survey of
employers and employees throughout Ireland. For the employer survey, a
stratified sample design was chosen in relation to star rating and
geographical spread. Because hotels provide a broad range of facilities,
they are classified from 1 * to 5 * categories in increasing order of
quality and service. All five * hotels were selected and a random sample
of one in two of four *, three *, two *, one * and unclassified hotels.
All five star hotels were selected which included 23 at the time of the
survey. Also, these hotels offer a wide range of facilities. They have
the most sophisticated product. The key respondent for the employer
survey was the human resource manager and, in his/her absence, the
general manager. A total of 470 employers were surveyed. This served to
generate a response rate of 40% for employers which included 177 usable
questionnaires out of a sample of 442. Qualitative interviews with
leading Irish hotel industry spokespersons were used to clarify and
confirm aspects of the research setting.
It was decided to survey employees of five, four and three star
hotels in a unionised group, a non-unionised group and two family-run
hotels, including a four * and a three *. In approximately half of the
hotels the human resource manager distributed the questionnaires to
employees and in the balance of hotels the author went along in person
and distributed the questionnaires at lunch time. This resulted in 246
successfully completed questionnaires out of a sample of 946 which was a
26% response rate.
3.2 QUESTION TYPE
0n the whole, forced choice questions were used. In response to the
literature and the pilot survey, a complete range of responses were
listed wherever possible (de Vaus, 1993). Likert-style rating scales
were used. In addition, semantic differential formats were used in some
cases. Ranking formats were also used. The questions on work-life
balance issues were taken from a successful survey conducted by the
Industrial Statistics Unit, Trinity College Dublin in 2002.
3.3. METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURE
A pilot test was conducted among HR managers to ensure validity and
reliability. For reliability of attitude type questions a reliability
analysis-scale alpha was conducted which showed alpha to be .6872; this
was significant and demonstrated the ability of the questions to test
what they set out to test (Farrell, 2006, p. 103). A variety of
statistical techniques were used such as frequencies, cross tabulations,
correlations and regression analysis.
4.1. LINKAGE BETWEEN NUMERICAL FLEXIBILITY AND FUNCTIONAL
There is no relationship between the extent of numerical and
functional flexibility. This relationship can only be investigated for
the employer survey. In other words, hotels that operate numerical
flexibility do not necessarily engage in functional flexibility
practices. The extent of numerical and functional flexibility is
correlated with the extent of work-life balance supports (Table 1).
Hotels that have a high level of functional and numerical flexibility
also provide many work-life balance supports. The respective correlation
coefficients are .394 and .310. Employees concur with the employer.
According to the employee survey, the correlation between the extent of
functional flexibility and work-life balance support is .256.
4.2. NUMERICAL FLEXIBILITY
According to employers, the vast majority of hotels have permanent
part-time employees. As regards employees, of those who work fulltime,
approximately one tenth would prefer to job share. Those who work
part-time are happy to continue to do so. This is a significant finding
(p<.05) which supports the view that it is the fulfilment of
one's own personal values, purposes and goals that is driving the
worker, as opposed to money, power and job security. The interview with
the HR manager highlighted the fact that employees are demanding not
just a job to provide them with their primary needs, but also family
time and social interests outside the work environment.
Staff are employed on a supply and demand basis. There is evidence
in all hotels of part-timers being employed with no fixed number of
hours. It was found that part-time work does not lead to a heavy
workload. In addition, approximately half of full-time staff regularly
work longer than standard hours. In relation to the employees surveyed,
approximately half of the full--time employees work longer than standard
hours, as compared to a minimal number of part-time employees. This is
statistically significant (p<.05) and reflects standard practice in
the hotel industry regarding the long hours culture. Full-time employees
are not usually compensated for this work, whereas part-time employees
are usually paid by the hour. Furthermore, the findings show half of all
employees are of the opinion that putting in extra hours helps career
The most common qualification for full-time staff was a degree,
whereas for part-time staff it was Leaving Certificate. More full-time
workers are pursuing an educational qualification. Also, one half of
employers say that employees take up working time arrangements in order
to have more time for education. One third of employees surveyed
expressed the same opinion. The vast majority of people have been less
than three years in the present employment. The majority of employees
surveyed were working in a non-managerial capacity.
There are seven types of employees working in hotels i.e. permanent
employees, temporary employees, permanent part-time workers, fixed-term
contracts, casual employees, trainees and contract labour. Table 2 shows
the extent of numerical flexibility. Hotels are represented as having a
range varying from one category of worker present, to all seven
categories of worker employed.
4.3. FUNCTIONAL FLEXIBILITY
The majority of employers are of the opinion that functional
flexibility practices lead to greater job satisfaction, improved service
quality, opportunity to develop new skills and a more productive
workforce. Although employees are also positive, they are not emphatic
in their views about these work practices. A majority agree that service
quality results improve. Half agree that greater job satisfaction and
opportunity to develop new skills also result. A majority say these
practices do not result in greater decision making.
There are five types of functional flexibility present in hotels,
i.e. team working, quality circles, multi-skilling, job rotation and
problem solving groups. Table 3 shows the range of functionally flexible
work practices in hotels. Figures vary from .00 meaning no functional
flexibility, 1 signifying one practice present, up to all five types of
A regression analysis was done for functional flexibility and the
various independent variables which could impact on it (Table 4). In
relation to the independent variable functional flexibility c1a-c1e, job
type was significant (p<.05). It was found that managers and
supervisors have a higher level of functional flexibility than
employees. Regarding the independent variable functional flexibility
outcomes decision making, job type was also found to be significant
(p<.1) This means that managers and supervisors and those with a high
level of functional flexibility (10 per cent level) are more likely to
be positive about decision making. In relation to the independent
variable improved service quality, type of hotel was found to be
significant (p< .05). The family-owned hotels and those with a higher
number of stars are more positive about service quality. When we chose
the independent variable developing employee skills, star rating was
found to be significant (p<.05). Hotels with a higher number of stars
are associated with developing employee skills. This is as expected, as
these hotels have more resources at their disposal for staff
development. No difference was found when we tested with job
satisfaction as the independent variable.
There is no difference between full-time workers and part-time
workers for team working, multi-skilling, problem solving groups,
quality circles and job rotation
Part-time work results in the following benefits: improved employee
productivity, greater employee satisfaction, less absenteeism/sick
leave, less labor turnover, improves business results, helps retain key
employees, improves service quality and increases cost savings.
In a minority of cases, employees working part-time are paid less
than employees working full-time in comparable jobs. In addition, there
are cost savings with respect to fewer employee fringe benefits. An
employee working part-time usually gets an appropriate full-time job
very quickly. This was found to be more a feature of family-run hotels
and independent groups. Part-time workers are eligible for full-time
work in all hotel types. In non-unionised hotels, there was a greater
tendency to recruit part-time staff from the external labour market, as
Furthermore, the vast majority of all hotel employers were of the
opinion that there was no difference between part-time work outcomes and
full-time work outcomes. This could be due to the fact, that in the
hospitality industry, both part-time and full-time employees work side
by side, usually in a team. On the other hand, the interview with the HR
manager highlighted the fact that in his hotel having part-time staff
created an imbalance in the work environment. They were not perceived to
be as serious as full-time staff and based on this experience the hotel
in question now has no part-time staff.
The literature shows that part-time work has clear benefits for
management in helping them to adjust to circumstances and control costs,
while still meeting their targets. Approximately half of those surveyed
are of the opinion that part-time work leads to lack of job security. A
minority think that it leads to lack of promotion prospects.
Over half of employers are of the opinion that part-time work
improves service quality.
In relation to training, according to employers, an employee
working part-time who engages in training during non-work hours would
get time off in some cases and would be paid for working extra hours in
a majority of cases. This was found to be a feature of companies and
international chains and four and five star organisations. With respect
to employees surveyed, the majority replied that they are compensated
for training. There is no difference between full-time, part-time and
job-share in relation to compensation for training. As expected,
full-time employees spend more time training. The majority of full-time
and part-time employees are compensated for training. There is
considerable divergence between employers' views on training and
those of the employees. Employers' figures for training available
and compensation are higher than employees' experiences.
Contrary to some findings in the literature which found that
part-time jobs are dead end and insecure, the findings here show that,
in a large proportion of cases, an employee, working part-time, usually
gets an appropriate full-time job very quickly. The majority of
employers reflected the viewpoint that there is no difference between
full-time and part-time employees in terms of productivity, motivation,
absenteeism, turnover and work organisation.
It was found to be statistically significant that the majority of
full-time and part-time employees are happy with their present working
arrangements. In summary, part-time workers tend to be of both genders,
younger age group, work as an employee, less likely to work more than
standard hours, more likely to pursue an educational qualification, more
likely to work in the banqueting department, and less likely to work in
front office (Farrell, 2006, Appendix B, Tables B13-B19).
5.1 CORE-PERIPHERY MODEL OF WORK FLEXIBILITY
There is no relationship between the extent of numerical and
functional flexibility. In other words, hotels that operate numerical
flexibility do not necessarily engage in functional flexibility
practices. This is at variance with the thesis of the flexible firm,
which claims that numerical and functional flexibility are pursued in a
strategic way by firms (Atkinson, 1984a,b).
The results presented here would reflect Kalleberg's thesis
that the core-periphery model is not an accurate representation of how
firms organise their manpower. Furthermore, the findings here would not
support the theory that it is necessary to have a group of temporary
workers with low paid, insecure jobs and low commitment in order to
protect a core group of employees who are highly committed and who enjoy
functionally flexible stable employment. As reflected already, we see
that part-time employees have many benefits, some have training and they
are involved in team working and multi-skilling. According to O'
Connell et al. (2004) approximately one fifth of establishments had
implemented new work practices such as team working /multitasking/
According to employers, the vast majority of hotels have permanent
part-time employees (Table 2) and this reflects change in recent years
in government legislation which confers increased employment rights on
part-time employees, which are comparable to full-time employees. This
is in keeping with the findings of CERT (2001) who found that 90 per
cent of employees in the hotel industry are employed on a permanent
basis. Approximately half of those surveyed are of the opinion that
part-time work leads to lack of job security. A minority think that it
leads to lack of promotion prospects. There are literature references to
one particular perspective on flexibility which attributes the spread
and development of flexibility to the economic requirements of
employers. At its most extreme, it is a manner of degrading and
cheapening the work and security of the employees involved (Braverman,
1974). Furthermore, certain studies which reflect the perspective of the
employer found that cost savings for flexible workers can only be
achieved if they are effectively managed. Cost considerations for
employers include training, productivity issues, legal liability,
workplace safety and managerial problems. It was found to be
statistically significant that the majority of full-time and part-time
employees are happy with their present working arrangements. This shows
that part-time work is an optimum choice for some employees. As the
findings have shown earlier, this may be connected to work-life balance
priorities (Aybars, 2007). This discounts the notion of part-time work
being a poor option. Part-time workers have enhanced status as the
findings show, and part-time working is the preferential option for some
people. The vast majority of people have been less than three years in
the present employment. This reflects that fact that many employees
perceive working in the hospitality industry as a path to another
career. Staff are employed on a supply and demand basis. There is
evidence in all hotels of some part-timers being employed with no fixed
number of hours. This finding reflects research conducted by the
National Association of Citizens Advice Bureau--NACAB (1997), who found
that flexibility can lead to work procedures that are irresponsible.
As the evidence shows, there are some employees who have secure
employment but may not form part of the core. Also, there are peripheral
employees working in key areas of the hospitality industry. The flexible
firm model shows both the core and the periphery as separate employment
categories. However, there is evidence that part-time, temporary and
casual staff are part of the core rather than the periphery. Also, they
are essential to the organization. My findings support this latter
perspective. The evidence would also support Legge's theory that
the rise in numerical flexibility is not necessarily part of a
deliberate strategy but rather an opportunistic decision. The evidence
here shows that full-time employees work longer hours. This shows the
establishment's ability to get numerical flexibility from core
workers. Part-time employees only occasionally work longer hours.
Furthermore, the evidence presented here shows that both full-time and
part-time employees are involved in functional flexibility. In the hotel
sector, these groups of workers may work together within the same
departments. Also, they may even perform the same jobs within an
As regards recruiting full-time staff, less than half of all
managers found it reasonably difficult. A further one third found it
relatively easy. The recruitment of part-time staff from full-time
staff, asking on their own initiative to go part-time, was cited as
important. Likewise, there is some evidence of recruitment of part-time
staff from full-time staff who are asked by the management to go
part-time. In addition, regarding part-timers, there is evidence that
full-time staff are being recruited as part-timers after a break in
employment. In a majority of cases, direct recruitment of part-timers
from the labour market is considered the least effective means of
recruiting part-time staff. In this sense, the periphery employees
protect the core in some respects.
Over half of employers are of the opinion that part-time work
improves service quality. Service quality is central to the
effectiveness of the hospitality experience (Irish Tourism Industry
Confederation, 2002). It was found that functional flexibility leads to
more service quality. There is some evidence of a positive link between
flexible work and job quality even though there are costs involved here
too (Kelliher and Anderson, 2008). Lasierra (2007) found a positive
correlation between functional flexibility and competitive strategy
One could argue that the workforce is becoming increasingly
polarized into those who undertake core (permanent, full-time)
employment and those employed to take on peripheral (short-term contract
and casual) employment. There are mixed signals about the extent of
flexible work practices. The evidence presented here points to the
spread of flexible work practices but there is little evidence of a move
towards the flexible firm. There are small changes occurring in various
areas of flexibility. Employers are seeing it as a source of competitive
advantage. The research here shows that part-time work results in a more
competitive edge for the hotel, increased productivity and better
business results. Employees are benefitting from flexible work
arrangements for life style considerations. In summary, the
core-periphery model is not an accurate representation of the
organization of manpower in the hospitality industry in Ireland.
1. The "leaving certificate" is the final examination in
second level and the principal entry requirement for college.
Work flexibility is a complex issue with many ramifications. The
existence of the core-periphery model is not supported in the Irish
hospitality industry. There is evidence that flexibility is a strategy
which works in hotels. Matching staffing levels to peaks in demand may
indicate a more strategic approach to this question. Others argue that
it may be a pragmatic approach to labour market fluctuations. On the
other hand, employees are happy to choose flexible work arrangements for
life style which clearly benefits them.
Atkinson, J., "Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower
Management", Report Number 89, Brighton, Institute of Manpower
Studies, 1984a, 11-31.
Atkinson, J., "Manpower Strategies for Flexible
Organisations", Personnel Management, Vol. 16(8), 1984b, 28-31.
Aybars, A.I., "Work-life balance in the EU and leave
arrangements across welfare regimes", Industrial Relations Journal,
Vol. 38(6), 2007, 569-590.
Baggauley, P., "Gender and Labour Flexibility in Hotel and
Catering", The Service Industries Journal, VOl. 10(4),
Bird, E., Lynch, P.A. and Ingram,, "A. Gender and Employment
Flexibility within Hotel Front Offices", The Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 22(3), 2002, 99-116.
Braverman, H. Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work
in the Twentieth Century. New York, Monthly Review Press, 1974, cited in
A. M. Piso "Hotel and Catering Workers; Class and
Unionisation", Employee Relations, Vol. 21(2), 1999, 176-189.
Bryson, C. and Blackwell, R., "Managing Temporary Workers in
Higher Education: Still at the Margin", Personnel Review, Vol.
35(2), 2006, 207-224.
Buultjens, J. and Luckie, K., "Flexibility in the Hospitality
Industry", Proceedings of the 1997 Arranz Conference, Brisbane,
cited in Dyer, S. Flexibility Models: A Critical Analysis. International
Journal Of Manpower, Vol. 19(4), 1998, 223-233.
Cappelli, P. Rethinking Employment. British Journal of Industrial
Relations. 33(4), 1995, 563-602.
CERT. Employment Survey of the Tourism Industry in Ireland 2000,
Vol. 1, 2001. Hotel Sector, CHL Consulting Group, CERT, Dublin,
De Vaus, D.A. Surveys in Social Research. 3rd Edition, Allen and
Unwin, Australia, 1993.
Farrell, K. Exploring the Linkage between Work Flexibility and
Work-life Balance in the Irish Hospitality Industry, Unpublished Ph.D
thesis, Department of Business Administration, University College
Geary, J.F., "Employment Flexibility and Human Resource
Management: The Case of Three American Electronics Plants", Work,
Employment and Society, Vol. 6(25), 1992, 170.
Hoque, K., Human Resource Management in the Hotel Industry;
Strategy Innovation and Performance, Routledge, London and New York,
Humphreys, P., Fleming S. and O' Donnell O., Balancing Work
and Family Life, The Role of Flexible Working Arrangements, Dublin:
Institute of Public Administration, Department of Social, Community and
Family Affairs, 2000.
Hunter, L., McGregor, A., MacInnes, I. and Sproull, A., "The
Flexible Firm, Strategy and Segmentation", British Journal of
Industrial Relations, Vol. 31(3), 1993, 383-407.
Illeris, S., "Are Service Jobs as Bad as Theory Says? Some
Empirical Findings from Denmark", The Service Industries Journal,
Vol. 22(4), 2002, 1-18.
Industrial Statistics Unit, Off the Treadmill: Achieving Work-life
Balance, Report of Family/Friendly Framework Committee, Trinity College,
Dublin, Institute of Public Administration, 2002.
Irish Hotels Federation, Blueprint for the Future: A Strategic
Review and Recommendations for the Irish Hotel and Guesthouse Industry,
CHL Consulting Ltd, Dublin, 2001.
Irish Tourism Industry Confederation, The Impact of Tourism on the
Irish Economy: The Need for a Future Development Strategy, Tansey,
Webster, Stewart and Company Economic Consultants, Dublin, 2002, 1-36.
Johnson, J., "Flexible Working, Changing the Manager's
Role", Management Decision, Vol. 42(6), 2004, 721-737.
Kalleberg, A.L., Reynolds, J. and Marsden, P.V.,
"Externalising Employment: Flexible Staffing Arrangements in US
Organisations", Unpublished Paper 2001, University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill, cited in A.L. Kalleberg, "Organising
Flexibility: The Flexible Firm in a New Century", British Journal
of Industrial Relations, Vol. 39(4), 2001, 479-504.
Kelliher, C. and Anderson, D.. For better or for worse? "An
analysis of how flexible working practices influence employees'
perceptions of job quality", International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 19(3), 2008, 419431.
Kerkhofs, M., Chung, H. and Ester, P., "Working time
flexibility across Europe: a typology using firm-level data",
Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 39 (6): 2008, 569-585.
Lasierra, J.M., "Labour flexibility and job market
segmentation in Spain: a perspective from the labour demand side",
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18(10), 2007,
Legge, K., Human Resource Management Rhetorics and Realities,
MacMillan Business, Houndmills: Basingstoke, 1995.
Lucas, R., "Industrial Relations in Hotel and Catering:
Neglect and Paradox", British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.
34(2), 1996, 269-86. cited in K. Hoque. Human Resource Management in the
Hotel Industry; Strategy Innovation and Performance, Routledge:London
and New York, 2000.
MacInnes, J. The Question of Flexibility. Research Paper Number 5.
University of Glasgow. Dept. of Social & Economic Research, 1988.
Marchington, M. Wilkinson, A.. Core Personnel and Development. IPD:
Marginson, P., Edwards, P., Martin, R., Purcell, J. and Sisson, K.,
Beyond the Workplace, Managing Industrial Relations in the
Multi-establishment Enterprise. Blackwell, London.1988.
Morley, M.J. and Garavan, T.N., "Current Themes in
Organisational Design: Implications for Human Resource Management",
Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 19(1), 1995, 3-13.
National Association of Citizens Advice Bureau, Report E/4/97
September, NACAB, ISBN 0 906072 36 0, 1997.
O'Connell, P.J., Russel, H., Williams, J. and Blackwell, S.,
The Changing Workplace: A Survey of Employees' Views and
Experiences, Research Series Number 2, Dublin. National Centre for
Partnership and Performance, Economic and Social Research Institute.
Okumus, F., "Can Hospitality Researchers Contribute to the
Strategic Management Literature?", International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 21(2), 2002, 105-110.
Olmsted, B. and Smith, S., Creating a Flexible Workplace: How to
Select and Manage Alternative Work Options, New York. AMACOM, American
Management Association, 1989.
Pollert, A., "The 'Flexible Firm' Fixation or
Fact?", Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 2(3), 1988, 281-316.
Pollert, A., (editor) Farewell to Flexibility? Basil Blackwell,
Proctor, S., Rowlinson, M., McArdle, L., Hassard, J. and Forrester,
P., "Flexibility, Politics and Strategy: In Defence of the Model of
the Flexible Firm", Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 8(2), 1994,
Tarique, I and Schuler, R., "Emerging issues and challenges in
global staffing: a North American perspective", International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 19(8), 2008, 1397-1415.
Van Scotter, J.R. and Culligan, P.E., "The Value of
Theoretical Research and Applied Research for the Hospitality
Industry", Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
Vol. 44(2), 2003, 14-27.
Walsh, J. and Deery, S., "Understanding the Peripheral
Workforce: Evidence from the Service Sector", HR Management
Journal, 9(2), 1999, 50-63.
Kathleen Farrell, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland
Dr. Kathleen Farrell earned her PhD at University College Dublin in
2007. Currently she is employed as a lecturer in management and
communication in Dublin Institute of Technology. Her research areas
include work-life balance, management and tourism.
should be abandoned as a framework
for research and replaced with a more
complex perspective, which relates to
the untidy and contradictory dynamics
of the real world.
CORRELATION BETWEEN FUNCTIONAL/NUMERICAL FLEXIBILITY
AND WORK-LIFE BALANCE ISSUES (EMPLOYER SURVEY)
work life balance Pearson Correlation 1
supports b3 Sig. (2-tailed) ...
extent of numerical Pearson Correlation .310 **
flexability types qa6 Sig. (2-tailed) 0
numerical flexability Pearson Correlation .057
percentage qb1 types Sig. (2-tailed) .447
of workers plus work N
extent of types of Pearson Correlation .394 **
functional flexability Sig. (2-tailed) .000
e1 N 177
work life balance Pearson Correlation .310 **
supports b3 Sig. (2-tailed) 0
extent of numerical Pearson Correlation 1
flexability types qa6 Sig. (2-tailed) ...
numerical flexability Pearson Correlation .253 **
percentage qb1 types Sig. (2-tailed) .001
of workers plus work N
extent of types of Pearson Correlation .085
functional flexability Sig. (2-tailed) .261
e1 N 176
qb1 types of
work life balance Pearson Correlation .057
supports b3 Sig. (2-tailed) .447
extent of numerical Pearson Correlation .253 **
flexability types qa6 Sig. (2-tailed) .001
numerical flexability Pearson Correlation 1
percentage qb1 types Sig. (2-tailed) ...
of workers plus work N
extent of types of Pearson Correlation .086
functional flexability Sig. (2-tailed) .254
e1 N 177
extent of types
work life balance Pearson Correlation .394 **
supports b3 Sig. (2-tailed) 0
extent of numerical Pearson Correlation .085
flexability types qa6 Sig. (2-tailed) .261
numerical flexability Pearson Correlation .086
percentage qb1 types Sig. (2-tailed) .254
of workers plus work N
extent of types of Pearson Correlation 1
functional flexability Sig. (2-tailed) ...
e1 N 177
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
COMPOSITE FIGURES OF THE EXTENT OF TYPES OF NUMERICAL
Extent of Types of
Numerical Flexibility Yes percentage Number
One category of worker 2 N=3
2 17 N=29
3 26 N=46
4 27 N=48
5 19 N=34
6 5 N=9
Seven categories of worker 4 N=7
Total 100 N=176
COMPOSITE FIGURES OF TYPES OF FUNCTIONAL FLEXIBILITY
Extent of Types of Functional Yes Percentage Number
?.00 10 N=18
One type of functional flexibility 26 N=45
2 37 N=66
3 20 N=36
4 3 N= 5
All five types of functional flexibility 4 N=7
Total 100 N=177
MULTIPLE REGRESSION OF FUNCTIONAL FLEXIBILITY C1a-C1e (EMPLOYEE
PARTICIPATION IN TEAMWORKING, QUALITY CIRCLES, ETC.), FUNCTIONAL
FLEXIBILITY OUTCOMES DECISION_MAKING, FUNCTIONAL FLEXIBILITY
OUTCOMES SERVICE QUALITY ANF FUNCTIONAL FLEXIBILITY OUTCOMES
Employee and Organisational Dependent Variables
Number of Stars -.009 .098
Type of Hotel .102 .113
Age -.109 -.138
Gender .002 .062
Qualification -.019 -.040
Pursuing an Educational
Qualification .006 -.091
Trade Union in
Organisation -.013 -.072
Job Description -.201 * -.150 **
Func. Flex. C1a-C1e .153
R .224 .295
R Square .050 .087
Employee and Organisational Standardised Beta
Number of Stars .175 .261 *
Type of Hotel .297* .174
Age -.081 -.100
Gender -.044 .042
Qualification .040 -.051
Pursuing an Educational
Qualification .079 .020
Trade Union in
Organisation .030 .038
Job Description .054 -.010
Func. Flex. C1a-C1e .060 .035
R .276 .239
R Square .076 .057
* p<.05 ** p<.1