Corporate Family-Friendly Policies: The Possibility of Implementation in Russian Regions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2022-4-11Keywords:
demographic policy, family-friendly policy, staff, social responsibility of business, cluster analysis, Russian regionsAbstract
Various social institutions may be involved in the implementation of the state’s pro-natalist policy. Family-friendly corporate policies, common in many countries, are still quite rare in Russia. At the same time, many socio-economic indicators significantly differ across Russian regions. The study aims to identify regional development models of the Russian corporate sector and determine those models that have the highest potential for dissemination of family-friendly corporate policies aimed at increasing the birth rate of the population in these regions. It is hypothesised that such Russian regions can be identified based on a multidimensional classification of socio-economic indicators. The hierarchical cluster analysis was used to model the Russian economic space. Then, the clusters were further grouped according to additional variables. The article analysed official regional statistics characterising the development of the corporate sector. Five clusters of Russian regions were identified. It is proved that corporate family-friendly policies can be disseminated in two regions in particular. Specific demographic (in particular, low birth rate and growth potential) and economic (high innovative activity, small number of loss-making enterprises, the highest demographic indicators among organisations and the average level of priveate consumption) conditions are observed in these clusters. It is concluded that in the corporate sector of these Russian regions, family-friendly policy may gain popularity among staff. This approach, accessible to enterprises, can act as an effective tool of demographic policy. Further research should focus on the analysis of cases of Russian enterprises implementing family-friendly policies, identification of benchmarks, assessment of the possibilities of scaling such experience and forecasting its demographic results.
References
Aldenderfer, M. S. & Blashfield, R. K. (1989). Faktornyy, diskriminantnyy i klasternyy Analiz [Factor, discriminant and cluster analysis]. Trans. Moscow: Finance and statistics, 215. (In Russ.)
Ayvazyan, S. A. (2010). Metody ekonometriki [Methods of econometrics]. Moscow: INFRA-M, 512. (In Russ.)
Bourhis, A. & Mekkaoui, R. (2010). Beyond Work-Family Balance: Are Family-Friendly Organizations More Attractive? Relations Industrielles / Industrial Relations, 65(1), 98–117. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23078261.
Breaugh, J. A. & Frye, N. K. (2007). An Examination of the Antecedents and Consequences of the Use of Family-Friendly Benefits. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(1), 35-52.
Callan, S. (2007). Implications of family-friendly policies for organizational culture: findings from two case studies. Work, Employment & Society, 21(4), 673–691. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23748295.
Chernova, Zh. V. (2017). Family friendly workplace: political initiatives, employer’s position and types of support for workers with family responsibilities. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 20(1), 93-113. (In Russ.)
Feeney, M. K. & Stritch, J. M. (2019). Family-Friendly Policies, Gender, and Work–Life Balance in the Public Sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(3), 422-448.
Fomby, T. B., Johnson, S. R. & Hill, R .C. (1984). Multicollinearity. In: Advanced Econometric Methods (pp. 283-306). New York: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8746-4_13
Hao, Y., Wang, Y. & Lu, H. (2016). A review of research and the status of implementation of family-oriented policies. Human Resource Development in China, 23, 41–49. (In Chinese).
Homans, G. C. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace & World.
Jang, H. & Ahn, H. (2021). Organizational responses to work-life balance issues: The adoption and use of family-friendly policies in Korean organizations. International Review of Public Administration, 26(3), 238-253.
Kim, J. & Wiggins, M. E. (2011). Family-Friendly Human Resource Policy: Is It Still Working in the Public Sector? Public Administration Review, 71, 728-739. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02412.x.
Kim, J. S. & Yeo, Y. H. (2019). Family-friendly policy and childbirth intention: Mediating effect of family life satisfaction. Asia Life Sciences, 3, 75-84.
Klupt, M. A. (2006). Elaboration of the strategy for demographic development as a field of interdisciplinary synthes. In: Problemy ekonomicheskoy teorii i politiki». Mat-ly VI ezhegodnaoy konferentsii «Leontevskie chteniya» [VI Annual Conference from the Series of Leontief Readings “problems Of Economic Theory And Policy”]. Moscow. (In Russ.)
Klupt, M. A. (2015). Population and procreation. In: I. I. Eliseeva, A. Xu (Eds.), Semya v Rossii i Kitae: protsess modernizatsii [Family in Russia and China: process of modernization] (pp. 15-29). St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 720. (In Russ.)
Lee, S.-Y. & Hong, J. H. (2011). Does Family-Friendly Policy Matter? Testing Its Impact on Turnover and Performance. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 870–879. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41317386.
Meyer, J. & Rowan, B. (2014). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure As Myth And Ceremony. Trans. In: Klassika novoy ekonomicheskoy sotsiologii [Classics in New Economic Sociology] (pp. 133-163). Moscow: HSE Publiushing House. (In Russ.)
Nabergoj, A. S. & Pahor, M. (2016). Family-friendly workplace: An analysis of organizational effects in the transition economy. Journal of East European Management Studies, 21(3), 352–373.
Rostovskaya, T. K., Shabunova, A. A. & Bagirova, A. P. (2021). The concept for corporate demographic policy of Russian enterprises in the framework of corporate social responsibility. Ekonomicheskie i sotsialnye peremeny: fakty, tendentsii, prognoz [Economic and social changes: facts, trends, forecast], 14(5), 151-164. DOI: 10.15838/esc.2021.5.77.9. (In Russ.)
Vavilova, A. S. (2021). Role of corporate demographic policy in supporting the family and human capacity development. In: III Vseros. demograficheskiy forum s mezhdunar. uchastiem: mat-ly foruma [III All-Russian Demographic Forum with international participation: materials of the forum] (pp. 26-29). Moscow: FCTAS RAS. (In Russ.)
Vysniauskiene, S. & Braziene, R. (2017). Evaluation of family friendly policy in Lithuania. Public Policy and Administration, 16(3), 455-467.
Wang, F., Zhao, L.Q. & Zhao, Z. (2016). China’s family planning policies and their labor market consequences. Journal of population economics, 30(1), 31-68. DOI: 10.1007/s00148-016-0613-0.
Wang, Q. & Qin, S. (2019). Practice and manageability of the program of assistance to employees in managing stress in migrant workers — The example of guest workers at Factory X. Journal of Social Work. 1(6), 91-99. (In Chinese).
Xu, S., Li, L., Lai, S. & Lu, Y. (2021). New progress in research on family-friendly welfare in enterprises: a review of influencing factors and effects from a social point of view. Development of Human Resources, 38(1), 113-129. DOI: 10.16471/j.cnki.11-2822/c.2021.2.008. (In Chinese).
Yu, H. H. (2019). Work-Life Balance: An Exploratory Analysis of Family-Friendly Policies for Reducing Turnover Intentions Among Women in U.S. Federal Law Enforcement. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(4), 345-357.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Oksana Shubat, Anna Bagirova, Doudou Yan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
