Boundary Work Tactics Measure

Abstract

The Boundary Work Tactics Measure (BWTM) is a 21-item psychological instrument developed by Reinke, Niederkrome, and Ohly in 2023. It is specifically designed to evaluate how individuals actively manage the boundaries between their work and non-work domains, focusing particularly on availability related to Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) outside of standard working hours.

The scale’s foundation rests on a thorough literature review, notably incorporating frameworks such as those proposed by Clark (2000). Through rigorous psychometric properties analysis, the BWTM was structured into three distinct, motive-oriented subscales: preventive, restrictive, and rejecting tactics. The initial validation sample included a diverse group of employed individuals, working students, and civil servants, ensuring comprehensive empirical support for the instrument’s intended use in studying Work-Life Balance strategies.

Keywords

Work-Life Boundaries, Work-Nonwork Life, Availability-Related Boundary Work Tactics, Restrictive, Preventive, Rejecting, Boundaries (Psychological), Strategies, Organizational and Occupational Measures, Boundary Work, Work-Life Balance.

Authors

Reinke, Kathrin, Niederkrome, Lisa, Ohly, Sandra.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Boundary Work Tactics Measure is to provide a nuanced understanding of an individual’s conscious actions aimed at controlling the intrusion of work into personal life, specifically concerning availability. The instrument serves to differentiate various types of availability-related boundary work tactics employed by individuals.

More specifically, the questionnaire organizes these tactics based on their underlying motivational orientation—categorizing them as preventive (proactive measures to avoid intrusion), restrictive (in-the-moment limitations on engagement), or rejecting (active avoidance or refusal of contact).

Construct

The BWTM measures Availability-Related Boundary Work Tactics, which are the behavioral strategies individuals use to manage the permeability and flexibility of the border between their professional and private lives. This construct is crucial in the context of increasing reliance on Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), which often blur traditional time and space boundaries.

The scale operationalizes this construct through three distinct dimensions:

• Preventive Tactics: Strategies employed beforehand to minimize work-related contact (e.g., using separate devices, setting out-of-office messages).

• Restrictive Tactics: Actions taken during leisure time to limit interaction when contact occurs (e.g., limiting response timing, restricting communication format).

• Rejecting Tactics: Passive acceptance or active refusal of work intrusion during non-work hours (measured by reverse-scored items reflecting acceptance of blurring boundaries).

Validity

The Validity of the BWTM was established through examinations of both Convergent and Discriminant Validity. The measure demonstrated that the three motive-oriented tactics are statistically distinct constructs, confirming their differential roles within the nomological network of boundary management.

Correlations between the subscales and the general construct of Boundary Work tactics were generally low to medium (highest r = .57). Crucially, the three tactics exhibited differential correlations with related variables like segmentation preferences and segmentation enactment. For instance, restrictive tactics showed the lowest correlations with segmentation preferences (r = .19) and enactment (r = .21), suggesting these tactics are less driven by a desire for strict segmentation. Conversely, rejecting tactics showed the highest correlations (r = .38 and r = .52, respectively), supporting the theoretical expectation that active rejection is closely tied to strong segmentation desires.

Reliability

The Reliability of the Boundary Work Tactics Measure was assessed via internal consistency metrics. The analysis utilized Cronbach’s alpha for the subscales, yielding results ranging from .87 to .91.

These high alpha coefficients indicate a strong level of internal consistency across the three subscales (preventive, restrictive, and rejecting tactics), confirming that the items within each factor reliably measure the intended underlying construct.

Factor Analysis

The structural integrity of the BWTM was evaluated through both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Initial EFA using Kaiser’s criteria suggested multiple factors, but a review of the scree plot and conceptual interpretability supported a robust three-factor solution, aligning perfectly with the proposed motive-oriented tactics (preventive, restrictive, rejecting).

This chosen three-factor model accounted for 38.48% of the total variance. Subsequent CFA confirmed the superiority of this structure. Following item refinement, the final three-factor model demonstrated excellent fit indices (χ2 = 347.89, df = 180; RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.08), significantly outperforming the alternative one-factor model (χ2 = 591.30, df = 179; RMSEA = 0.12; CFI = 0.84, SRMR = 0.13). These findings provide strong statistical support for the multidimensional nature of the scale.

Instrument

Test Type: Original

Format: Items are measured on a response scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always).

Language Available: English, German

Population Group: Human (Male and Female)

Age Group: Adulthood (18 years and older)

Population Details: The respondents were adult participants located in Germany, including employed individuals, working students, civil servants, and self-employed individuals.

Test Methodology: The methodology involved various psychometric properties analyses including Test Validity, Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency, Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).

Keywords

Work-Life Boundaries, Work-Nonwork Life, Availability-Related Boundary Work Tactics, Restrictive, Preventive, Rejecting, Strategies, Organizational Measures, Work-Life Balance.

Authors

Reinke, Kathrin

• Author ORCID Identifier: 0000-0002-1116-4436

• Affiliation: Hochschule Fresenius, Department of Business Psychology

Niederkrome, Lisa

• Affiliation: University of Kassel, Department of Business Psychology

Ohly, Sandra

• Author ORCID Identifier: 0000-0001-6818-7519

• Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected]

• Correspondence Address: University of Kassel, Department of Psychology, ITeG, Pfannkuchstraβe 1, Kassel, Germany, 34121

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: May be used for Research/Teaching purposes.

Commercial Use: No

Fee: No

Test Year: 2023

Web Site (License): creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en

References

Reinke, K., Niederkrome, L., & Ohly, S. (2024). Boundary work tactics and their effects on information and communication technology use after hours and recovery: Taking action when boundaries are blurring. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 23(1), 36–48. doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000335

Items of the Boundary Work Tactics Measure

The Boundary Work Tactics Measure is a 21-item scale.

Factors and Subscales: The scale is structured into three subscales:

• Preventive tactics

• Restrictive tactics

• Rejecting tactics

Test Items Available: Yes, the test items are available. No data is Available regarding the location of the test items other than in Supplemental Material S3, Pages 5-6 of the source reference.

Preventive Tactics

1. Utilization of distinct phone numbers for work-related and personal matters.

2. Utilization of distinct Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for work-related and personal matters.

3. Indication of availability status (e.g., online or absent) to work contacts during leisure time.

4. Provision of absence notes to work contacts to indicate unavailability during leisure time.

5. Communication to customers or colleagues of a preference not to be contacted via ICT for work-related matters during leisure time.

6. Communication to supervisors of a preference not to be contacted via ICT for work-related matters during leisure time.

7. Communication to work contacts that ICT contact during leisure time is reserved exclusively for emergencies.

Restrictive Tactics

In my leisure time:

1. Limitation of ICT use (e.g., smartphone only, laptop only) for receiving and editing work-related messages.

2. Cessation of ICT use when professionally contacted at specific times (e.g., during social interactions, sports, dinner).

3. Limitation to written messages (no phone calls) for work-related communication to maintain flexibility in determining response timing and method.

4. Limitation of ICT use for work-related matters to designated time slots.

5. Review of work-related messages exclusively at specific times.

6. Limitation of the duration of ICT use for work-related purposes.

7. Decision on whether to address work-related calls based on the caller.

8. Decision on responding to work-related messages based on urgency, utilizing an answering machine or mailbox.

9. Decision on which work-related messages to read or process based on urgency.

Rejecting Tactics

1. In my leisure time, I read work-related messages. (r)

2. In my free time, I check work-related messages. (r)

3. I carry ICT, on which I am contacted professionally, with me in my leisure time. (r)

4. I carry ICT, on which I am contacted professionally, with me on vacation. (r)

5. In my leisure time, I take work-related calls. (r)

Note: Items are rated from 1 (never) to 5 (always).