Everyone experiences major life transitions (e.g. relocation, job loss, birth of a child), and increasingly so as economic, technological, and social environments become more turbulent. Yet in accounting for how work-life decision-making associated with these transitions occurs, we argue that extant theory overfocuses on individual agency and rational thinking.
In this article, we bridge an epistemological divide between the study of major life transitions and work-life decision-making by advancing a narrative theory of aberrant work-life navigation.
Our theory overcomes blind spots around the study of “real life,” lived experiences, introducing work-life navigation as a messy, complex, and volatile process, capturing the ontology of how individuals experience major life transitions.
We point out factors that inhibit rationality and constrain agency traditionally ascribed to work-life decision-making at the individual (intuitive and unconscious thoughts, emotions, impulsivity, and inaction) and contextual (work-life stakeholders, cultural norms, and regulations) levels.
Further, we apply our theorizing to the most studied outcomes associated with major life transitions—work-life balance, conflict, and enrichment—to highlight how these are inherently subjective and, at times, determined by factors entirely beyond one’s control.
We conclude by offering a future research agenda to empirically test our theory of aberrant work-life navigation.
The Author at the Department of Management: Marcello Russo