Work-Lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century: Preference Theory [Paperback]

Hakim offers four main tenets of preference theory: First, she says there have been five historical social changes which have led to a new scenario for women and their work choices: a. The 60's contraceptive revolution which gave women control over their fertility. b. The equal opportunities revolution, giving women equal access to the labour market. c. The rise of white-collar work, which tends to be more appealing to women. d. The creation of jobs for secondary work, where career is not the number one priority. e. The rising importance of preferences, choices and lifestyle options in affluent societies.

Second, women have many different preferences when it comes to work. In particular, there are three idealised preferences most women have: a. Home centered preferences (about 20% of women). b. Work centered preferences (about 20%). c. Adoptive (a combination of work and home) preferences (about 60%).

Third, these different preferences result in conflicts between different types of women. Men, on the other hand, are much more homogenous in their preferences, and thus have an advantage over the heterogeneous women. As a result, for many women, much conflict tends to arise because of these diverse preferences.

Fourth, the diversity of women's preferences means that public policy needs to be more diverse, catering to the different needs and desires of women, instead of trying to aim for just one approach.

Using this four-fold approach to questions of female work and lifestyle choices, she offers an incisive and thought-provoking analysis which will offer much to all sides of the debate. That is, both conservatives and feminists may need to readjust their agendas, in the light of this growing body of research.

One of the major conclusions of this research is that women clearly do not have one view on the issue of work and home, but many. Therefore, social policy should be flexible enough to meet the various preferences women in fact have. Policies should not seek to force women into some predetermined mould. Thus, if some women want to stay at home, and eschew the paid workplace, then government policies should recognise and accept those preferences. Indeed, research seems to indicate that, for various reasons, only a minority of women will want, and will reach, the top positions of power in the workforce.

Contrary to much feminist rhetoric, many women prefer either part-time work or no paid work at all. Not every women is chafing at the bits to flee the home for a life as a career woman. Certainly some are however. So government policy should cater for such divergence of interests and desires. And research makes it clear that this diversity of preferences will remain strong.

Thus if governments want to really honour the diversity of women in their choices, they should create policies which maximise choice, and forego coercive policies designed to create a pre-determined end. In this respect Hakim suggests that governments might adopt a kind of home-makers' allowance, available to all women. This should be available to all mothers for three years or more after each birth, irrespective of their employment record.

The importance of Hakim's thesis cannot be underestimated. The "one-size-fits-all" approach of many western governments (usually a feminist version of things) to questions of women and work tend to be restrictive and coercive. They just do not take into account the many real differences women have on the issue. Hakim's work shows us that women, like men, are not all of one piece, are not all cut from the same cloth. There is a wide-array of diversity and differences of opinion about the relationships between work, home, family, and other choices. Governments need to respect such diversity. This book is an important contribution to that end.