Determinants of return to work after maternity leave in Russia: A logistic regression approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu18.2020.304Аннотация
This paper aims to identify the determinants of return to work after maternity leave in Russia. Can an organisation influence employees’ decision about withdrawal from the market after leave arrangement, or does it fully depend on the contextual and personal characteristics of the employee, as assumed by the discourses of merit and choice? Logistic regression analysis helps to answer the raised questions, referring to responses of 721 mothers with previous working experience. The research revealed that employers indeed can improve inclusion of employees with childcare commitments, fostering their return after the maternity leave. Despite high regional diversity of Russian population, contextual specificity barely influences the decision of employees regarding their returning to work with the same employer, similarly to their level of education, firms’ equity or amount of children. Among personal characteristics, income was found to play an important role in return decisions, as well as the age of the smallest child. The paper contributes to the debates on the fluidity of gender and work identity as well as organizational control over the identity work.
Ключевые слова:
childcare commitments, maternity leave, work system, Russia
Скачивания
Данные скачивания пока недоступны.
Библиографические ссылки
REFERENCES
Alvesson M., Willmott H. 2002. Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies 39 (5): 619–644.
Ashcraft K. L., Harris K. L. 2014. Meaning that matters: An organizational communication perspective on gender, discourse, and materiality. In: S. Kumra, R. Simpson, R. J. Burke (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Gender in Organizations, 130–150. Oxford University Press: N.Y.
Becker B. E., Huselid M. A. 2006. Strategic human resources management: where do we go from here? Journal of Management 32 (6): 898–925.
Borah P. 2011. Conceptual issues in framing theory: A systematic examination of a decade’s literature. Journal of Communication 61 (2): 246–263.
Bordunos A. 2019. Alternatives to a “roseate view”: Inclusion of employees with childcare commitments. Organizational Psychology 9 (4): 141–173. (In Russian)
Bordunos A. K., Kosheleva S. V. 2019. Work systems as frames of reference for HR disclosure. Russian Management Journal 17 (3): 309–336.
Brady M. 2016. Gluing, catching and connecting: How informal childcare strengthens single mothers’ employment trajectories. Work, Employment and Society 30 (5): 821–837.
Broadbridge A., Simpson R. 2011. 25 years on: Reflecting on the past and looking to the future in gender and management research. British Journal of Management 22 (3): 470–483.
Bruckmüller S., Ryan M. K., Rink F., Haslam S. A. 2014. Beyond the glass ceiling: The glass cliff and its lessons for organizational policy. Social Issues and Policy Review 8 (1): 202–232.
Burke R. J. 2014. Organizational culture, work investments, and the careers of men: Disadvantages of women? In: S. Kumra, R. Simpson, R. Burke (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Gender in Organizations, 371–392. Oxford University Press: N.Y.
Cabrera-Fernández A. I., Martínez-Jiménez R., Hernández-Ortiz M. J. 2016. Women’s participation on boards of directors: A review of the literature. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 8 (1): 69–89.
Caprile M., Vallès N. 2010. Meta-analysis of gender and science. Research Topic Report: Science as a Labour Activity. Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg.
Clark S. C. 2000. Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations 53 (6): 747–770.
Cortina L. M. 2008. Unseen injustice: Incivility as modern discrimination in organizations. Academy of Management Review 33 (1): 55–75.
Davey B., Murrells T., Robinson S. 2005. Returning to work after maternity leave: UK nurses’ motivations and preferences. Work, Employment and Society 19 (2): 327–348.
Dobusch L., Kapeller J. 2013. Breaking new paths: Theory and method in path dependence research. Schmalenbach Business Review 65: 288–311.
Eagly A. H., Wood W. 2013. Feminism and evolutionary psychology: Moving forward. Sex Roles 69: 549–556.
Ebbers I., Piper A. 2017. Satisfactions comparisons: Women with families, full-time and part-time self-employed. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 9 (2): 171–187.
Ellemers N. 2018. Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology 69: 275–298.
Ellemers N., Rink F. 2016. Diversity in work groups. Current Opinion in Psychology 11: 49–53.
Ellison K. 2017. The Mommy Brain: How Motherhood Makes Us Smarter. Alpina Publisher: Moscow.
Farndale E., Paauwe J. 2018. SHRM and context: Why firms want to be as different as legitimately possible. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance 5 (3): 202–210.
Federal State Statistics Service. 2019. [Electronic resource]. https://rosstat.gov.ru/ (accessed: 01.09.2019). (In Russian)
Fedorenko N. 2019. Where did the list of professions prohibited for women come from, and what will happen to it now. Theory and Practice. [Electronic resource]. https://theoryandpractice.ru/posts/17536-otkuda-vzyalsya-spisok-professiy-zapreshchennykh-dlya-zhenshchin-i-chto-s-nim-budetteper" (accessed: 01.09.2019). (In Russian)
Frost P., Robinson S. 1999. The toxic handler: Organizational hero and casualty. Harvard Business Review 77 (4): 97–97.
Fuller S., Cooke L. P. 2018. Workplace variation in fatherhood wage premiums: Do formalization and performance pay matter? Work, Employment and Society 32 (4): 768–788.
Gatrell C. 2011. Policy and the pregnant body at work: Strategies of secrecy, silence and supra-performance. Gender, Work and Organization 18 (2): 158–181.
Gaunt R., Pinho M. 2018. Do sexist mothers change more diapers? Ambivalent sexism, maternal gatekeeping, and the division of childcare. Sex Roles 79: 176–189.
Glomb T. M., Duffy M. K., Bono J. E., Yang T. 2011. Mindfulness at work. In: J. Martocchio, H. Liao, A. Joshi (eds). Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management Vol. 30, 115–157. Emerald: Bingley.
Goffman E. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Northeastern University Press: Boston.
Gutsell J. N., Remedios J. D. 2016. When men lean out: Subtle reminders of childraising intentions and men and women’s career interests. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 67: 28–33.
Hakim C. 2000. Work-lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century: Preference Theory. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Hennessey B., Amabile T. 1998. Reward, intrinsic motivation, and creativity. American Psychologist 53 (6): 674–676.
Hundera M., Duysters G., Naudé W., Dijkhuizen J. 2019. How do female entrepreneurs in developing countries cope with role conflict? International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 11 (2): 120–145.
Kabeer N. 1999. Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Development and Change 30 (3): 435–464.
Kosheleva S., Bordunos A. 2018. HRM systems effects as a basis for strategic HR planning. In: J. Fahed-Sreih (ed). Human Resource Planning for the 21st Century, 83–102. IntechOpen: London. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.75456
Kumra S. 2014. Gendered construction of merit and impression management with in professional service firms. In: S. Kumra, R. Simpson, R. Burke (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Gender in Organizations, 269–293. Oxford University Press: N.Y.
Lepak D. P., Snell S. A. 1999. The human resource architecture: Toward a theory of human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management Review 24 (1): 31–48.
Lepak D. P., Liao H., Chung Y., Harden E. E. 2006. A conceptual review of human resource management systems. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 25 (1): 217–271.
Metz I., Kulik C. T. 2014. The rocky climb: Womens advancement in management. In: S. Kumra, R. Simpson, R. J. Burke (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Gender in Organizations, 175–200. Oxford University Press: N.Y.
Pailhe A., Solaz A. 2018. Is there a wage cost for employees in family-friendly workplaces? The effect of different employer policies. Gender, Work and Organization 26 (5): 688–721.
Phillips T., Grandy G. 2018. Women leader/ship development: Mindfulness and wellbeing. Gender in Management: An International Journal 33 (5): 367–384.
Röder A., Ward M., Frese C.-A. 2018. From labour migrant to stay-at-home mother? Childcare and return to work among migrant mothers from the EU Accession Countries in Ireland. Work, Employment and Society 32 (5): 850–867.
Sealy R. 2010. Changing perceptions of meritocracy in senior women’s careers. Gender in Management: An International Journal 25 (3): 184–197.
Shore L. M., Chung-Herrera B. G., Dean M. A., Holcombe-Erhart K., Jung D. I., Randel A. E., Singh G. 2009. Diversity in organizations: Where are we now and where are we going? Human Resource Management Review 19 (2): 117–133.
Shore L. M., Cleveland J. N., Sanchez D. 2018. Inclusive workplaces: A review and model. Human Resource Management Review 28 (2): 176–189.
Shore L. M., Randel A. E., Chung B. G., Dean M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart K., Singh G. 2011. Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management 37 (4): 1262–1289.
Stets J. E., Burke P. J. 2000. Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly 63 (3): 224–237.
Suchman M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 571–610.
Temkina A., Zdravomyslova E. 2014. Gender’s crooked path: Feminism confronts Russian patriarchy. Current Sociology 62 (2): 253–270.
Thomas D. A., Ely R. J. 1996. Making differences matter. Harvard Business Review. [Electronic resource]. https://hbr.org/1996/09/making-differences-mattera-new-paradigm-for-managing-diversity (accessed: 01.01.2019).
Verheij J., Groeneveld S., Kuyper L. 2017. Diverse approaches to negative treatment in the workplace: Sector differences and their effects. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 36 (1): 54–72.
Vlasblom J. D., Schippers J. 2006. Changing dynamics in female employment around childbirth. Work, Employment and Society 20 (2): 329–347.
Walsh K., Gordon J. R. 2008. Creating an individual work identity. Human Resource Management Review 18 (1): 46–61.
Wei L. Q., Lau C. M. 2010. High performance work systems and performance: The role of adaptive capability. Human Relations 63 (10): 1487–1511.
Wilhelm C., Joeckel S. 2019. Gendered morality and backlash effects in online discussions: An experimental study on how users respond to hate speech comments against women and sexual minorities. Sex Roles 80 (7–8): 381–392.
Wilks M.-C. 2019. Activist, entrepreneur, or caretaker? Negotiating varieties of women in development. Gender and Society 33 (2): 224–250.
Zavyalova E. K., Kosheleva S. V. 2010. Gender stereotyping and its impact on human capital development in contemporary Russia. Human Resource Development International 13 (3): 341–349.
Zdravomyslova E. A., Temkina A. A. 2015. 12 Lectures on Gender Sociology: A Textbook. European University at St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg. (in Russian)
Загрузки
Опубликован
04.12.2020
Как цитировать
Bordunos, A. K., Kosheleva, S. V., & Zyryanova, A. (2020). Determinants of return to work after maternity leave in Russia: A logistic regression approach. Российский журнал менеджмента, 18(3), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu18.2020.304
Выпуск
Раздел
Теоретические и эмпирические исследования
Лицензия
Статьи журнала «Российский журнал менеджмента» находятся в открытом доступе и распространяются в соответствии с условиями Лицензионного Договора с Санкт-Петербургским государственным университетом, который бесплатно предоставляет авторам неограниченное распространение и самостоятельное архивирование.
