Rather than studying workplace flexibility as the availability or usage of flexible work practices, in this study, we theorize workplace flexibility as a subjective psychological experience influenced by employees' perceptions of control over where and when they work (psychological job control) and control over their social boundaries (boundary control). Based on boundary and border theory, using a two-wave study conducted at an Italian bank (N = 1423) and adopting a person-centered approach through latent transition analysis (LTA), we identified four flexibility profiles characterized by different levels of psychological job control and boundary control, with the same structure, dispersion, and sizes over time. The four profiles were: (1) flexible non-dividers (3.46 %), marked by high psychological job control and low boundary control; (2) flexible dividers (34.83 %), characterized by high levels of both psychological job control and boundary control; (3) non-flexible dividers (50.74 %), featuring low psychological job control but high boundary control; and (4) non-flexible non-dividers (10.97 %), with low levels of both types of control. Three of these profiles exhibited high within-person stability across time, while the flexible non-dividers profile was highly unstable, with many members transitioning to profiles with higher boundary control at Time 2. Organizational investments in training and communication programs may have contributed to these transitions from low to high boundary control profiles. Gender and age emerged as significant predictors of profile membership, with gender effects shifting over time: at Time 1, men were more likely to be in non-flexible dividers profile, while at Time 2, they were more likely to be in the flexible non-dividers profile. Age effects also changed: older workers were more likely to be in the flexible non-dividers profile at Time 1 but shifted toward the flexible dividers profile by Time 2. Parental status was not significant, whereas carer status was significant only at Time 1, where being a carer increased the likelihood of employees belonging to the flexible dividers profile compared to the non-flexible dividers. Our findings further revealed that the psychological experience of work flexibility positively impacts wellbeing when employees experience control over both work and social boundaries. Flexible dividers consistently exhibited the highest levels of work engagement, job satisfaction, and work-life balance across both Time 1 and Time 2. In contrast, flexible non-dividers showed a significant decline in these outcomes over time. Profiles with low boundary control, especially flexible non-dividers and non-flexible non-dividers, reported the lowest levels of wellbeing. Despite some improvements in non-flexible non-dividers profile from Time 1 to Time 2, it remained to have the lowest scores on all outcomes, emphasizing the critical role of boundary control in maintaining employee wellbeing over time. These findings provide a possible explanation regarding the “autonomy-control paradox,” where flexibility in work location and timing may reduce autonomy unless social boundaries are effectively managed. Having control over one's social domains allows for the benefits of workplace flexibility and reduces the risk that flexibility in where and when to work undermines the autonomy it is meant to provide.

中文翻译：

---

工作场所灵活性的心理体验：心理工作控制和边界控制概况与灵活工作者的福祉有何关系


在这项研究中，我们不是将工作场所灵活性研究为灵活工作实践的可用性或使用，而是将工作场所灵活性理论化为一种主观心理体验，受员工对工作地点和时间的控制（心理工作控制）和对社会界限的控制（边界控制）的影响。基于边界和边界理论，使用在意大利一家银行 （N = 1423） 进行的一项两波研究，并通过潜在过渡分析 （LTA） 采用以人为本的方法，我们确定了四种灵活性概况，其特征是心理工作控制和边界控制水平不同，随着时间的推移具有相同的结构、离散度和大小。这四个特征是：（1） 灵活的非分隔器 （3.46 %），以高心理工作控制和低边界控制为特征;（2） 灵活的分隔器 （34.83 %），其特征是高水平的心理工作控制和边界控制;（3） 非柔性分隔器 （50.74 %），具有低心理工作控制但高边界控制的特点;（4） 非柔性非分频器 （10.97 %），两种控制水平都较低。其中三个剖面在时间上表现出很高的人体内稳定性，而柔性非分隔剖面则高度不稳定，许多成员在时间 2 过渡到具有更高边界控制的剖面。组织对培训和通信计划的投资可能有助于这些从低边界控制概况到高边界控制概况的转变。性别和年龄成为概况成员的重要预测因素，性别效应随着时间的推移而变化：在时间 1，男性更有可能处于非灵活分界线概况，而在时间 2，他们更有可能处于灵活的非分界线概况中。 年龄效应也发生了变化：年长的员工在时间 1 时更有可能处于柔性非分隔线特征中，但在时间 2 时转向灵活分隔线特征。父母身份不显著，而照顾者状况仅在时间 1 显著，与非灵活隔板相比，作为照顾者增加了员工属于灵活隔板的可能性。我们的研究结果进一步揭示，当员工同时体验到对工作和社会界限的控制时，工作灵活性的心理体验会对幸福感产生积极影响。柔性隔板在时间 1 和时间 2 中始终表现出最高水平的工作参与度、工作满意度和工作与生活平衡。相比之下，柔性非分隔器显示这些结果随着时间的推移而显着下降。具有低边界控制的配置文件，尤其是柔性非分隔线和非柔性非分隔线，报告的幸福感水平最低。尽管从时间 1 到时间 2 的非柔性非分隔线剖面有所改进，但它在所有结果上的得分仍然是最低的，强调了边界控制在随着时间的推移维护员工福祉方面的关键作用。这些发现为“自主控制悖论”提供了可能的解释，即除非有效管理社会界限，否则工作地点和时间的灵活性可能会降低自主性。控制自己的社交领域可以带来工作场所灵活性的好处，并降低工作地点和时间的灵活性会破坏其本应提供的自主权的风险。