ILPC 2027

One-child policy There have been very few studies investigating Chinese employees from the one-child generation. To addresses this gap, this research examines issues of career aspiration, job satisfaction and work-life balance of one-child employees by comparing them with employees with siblings in China. We also compare the male and female groups within one-child employees to deepen our understanding of this cohort. The one-child policy (OCP) was introduced in 1979 as an extreme measure to control population growth. The policy applied mainly to ethnic majority han people living in urban cities where social resource was scarce, and restricted a couple to have only one child. Despites its positives, OCP has been widely criticised for producing a rapidly aging population and a shrinking labour force, which may affect China’s future competitive advantage (Cao et al., 2015; Jing, 2013). It is suggested that the aging population and OCP have significantly changed the structure of many Chinese households, which now display a 4-2-1 format that comprises of four grandparents, two parents and one child. This means a large number of modern Chinese families only have one adult child, who needs to take responsibility to look after at least two aging parents and four grandparents. Studies from developmental psychology suggest that OCP have produced less trusting, less trustworthy, more risk-averse, less collaborative, and more pessimistic individuals (Cameron et al., 2013; Chen, 1994). Theory In order to make sense of the different work-life concerns between one-child employees and employees with siblings, we adopted a demands-and-resources approach, which sees that work and family domains are highly permeable and individuals face demands and utilise resources to navigate the interface (Greenhaus and Powell, 2006; Voydanoff, 2005). Work-family balance, a state of being effective and satisfied in both work and family roles (Greenhaus and Allen, 2011), relies on whether resources available are sufficient to meet the demands from both roles (Voydanoff, 2004). A misfit between demands and resources may lead to negative physical or emotional outcomes in one or both domains and affect individuals’ overall well-being. Here, we conceptualise career expectations, time needed for elderly care and financial pressure as demands that are likely to cause work-life conflicts. Number of adult children in the family, financial support, social capital obtained from their family and positive emotions are conceptualised as useful resources that Chinese employees may use to cope with challenges from both work and family domains. Methodology Data were collected using a web-based survey. This study was conducted in two medium-size universities, whose HR managers randomly selected and sent the link of our survey by email to 200 full-time academic staff in each university. We argue our sample is suitable as Chinese academics are usually highly educated and have overseas experience and thus share similar characteristics with one-child generations who grew up in urban cities. The final sample consists of 218 employees. Measurement scales were first subject to Exploratory Factor Analysis, and the psychometric properties of the constructs were examined by Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Mann-Whitney U tests, a non-parametric test that compares differences between two independent groups with dependent variables, were used to compare between the non-one-child and one-child groups, as well as the female and male groups. Findings Our results revealed significant differences between one-child employees and employees with siblings in terms of career aspiration, job satisfaction and work-life balance. One-child employees are found to have a higher level of career aspiration, but lower levels of job satisfaction and work-life balance than employees with siblings. There are also significant differences between one-child male employees and female employees. While male employees have higher levels of career aspiration and work-life balance, female employees demonstrate more job satisfaction. Our results have significant implications on both Chinese organisations and society as a whole. At the organisational level, increased expectations and career aspirations and lower job satisfaction of one-child employees may create a generation of ‘unhappy’ employees who are less likely to cooperate with their peers or commit to their job and organisation. Imbalance between work and family and responsibility for elderly care (especially for the females) could lead to a higher level of absenteeism and lower work efficiency. At the societal level, evident from this research suggests that male and female employees of the one-child generation are facing different pressures. Female employees are expected to sacrifice their careers for the welfare of their husband and extended family, while male employees are expected to achieve more both economically and socially. Reference Cameron L, Erkal N, Gangadharan L, et al. (2013) Little emperors: behavioral impacts of China's One-Child Policy. Science 339: 953. Cao J, Cumming D and Wang X. (2015) One-child policy and family firms in China. Journal of Corporate Finance. Chen XF. (1994) The Social Impact of China's One-child Policy. Harvard Asia Pacific Review 23: 74-76. Greenhaus J and Powell G. (2006) When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review 31: 72-92. Greenhaus JH and Allen TD. (2011) Work-family balance: A review and extension of the literature. In: Quick JC and Tetrick LE (eds) Handbook of health psychology. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 165-183. Jing Y. (2013) The One‐child Policy Needs An Overhaul. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 32: 392-399. Voydanoff P. (2004) The Effects of Work Demands and Resources on Work-to-family Conflict and Facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family 66: 398-412. Voydanoff P. (2005) Toward a Conceptualization of Perceived Work-Family Fit and Balance: A Demands and Resources Approach. Journal of Marriage and Family 67: 822-836.