Key aspects influencing the effectiveness of family-friendly corporate policies
The effectiveness of family-friendly corporate policies can be examined through three interrelated dimensions: society, company, and employee (Blair-Loy & Wharton, 2002). These dimensions not only shape the implementation and outcomes of such policies but also serve as critical factors in assessing the potential transferability of the German model to the Chinese context.
From a societal perspective, beyond the mandatory requirements set by legal norms, factors such as demographic development, gender equality status, cultural concepts, and government support measures all influence companies’ willingness to adopt family-friendly policies (Blair-Loy & Wharton, 2002). An essential framework for understanding cross-cultural variations in policy adoption and effectiveness:
Population aging has emerged as a crucial social driver compelling governments and companies to implement family-friendly policies. Such policies not only contribute to an increase in birth rates but also serve as an essential strategy for companies to gain a competitive edge in the fierce talent competition (Castles, 2003). Although China and Germany differ significantly in population size, both countries exhibit similar trends in facing the challenges of population aging (Ni & Klammer, 2023). According to data from the World Bank, by 2023, individuals aged 65 and over accounted for 14% of the total population in China and 23% in Germany, both exceeding the global average (WB, 2023). Furthermore, life expectancy in both countries surpasses the global average of 71 years, reaching 79 years (China) and 81 years (Germany) (WB, 2022b). Meanwhile, the total fertility rates in both countries fall below the global average of 2.5%, with China’s rate at 1.2% and Germany’s at 1.5% (data from 2022) (WB, 2022a). While China still benefits from its “demographic dividend” (Meng, 2023), the rapid pace of aging will soon lead to labor shortages similar to those faced by Germany. Given that Germany entered into an aging society earlier and has accumulated rich experiences in addressing these challenges, its successful practices hold significant reference value for China (Ni, 2023).
In both Germany and China, family-friendly corporate policies primarily center on addressing gender equality issues within the labor market. These policies aim to promote gender equality by improving work-life balance, which in turn enhances the overall effectiveness. According to the Gender Inequality Index (GII) data from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP, 2022), both countries have made significant progress in reducing gender inequality, although Germany performs better (China: 0.186; Germany: 0.071; global average: 0.462). The GII measures women’s relative disadvantages in reproductive health, political participation, economic participation, and labor market performance. Specifically, the index reveals a gender gap in labor force participation rates (for individuals aged 15 and above) of -10.5% in Germany and -20.8% in China (UNDP, 2022). This suggests that China might face greater challenges in effectively implementing family-friendly corporate policies, as the gender gap in the workplace remains wider. Further evidence from surveys also indicates that Chinese women remain the primary caregivers for children, which exacerbates issues such as employment discrimination, income inequality, and career development barriers (UNICEF, 2022). As a result, Chinese women often bear a heavier dual burden of work and family responsibilities. In contrast, German women tend to address the “coordination problem” through part-time work and other flexible work arrangements (BMFSFJ, 2011), practices that are less common in Chinese society.
In 2001, Germany enacted the Partial Hours and Fixed-Term Employment Contracts Act (Teilzeit- und Befristungsgesetz) (BMAS, 2023), which provides a legal foundation for employees to realize flexible working arrangements. The core provisions of this law allow employees to apply for reduced working hours based on family responsibilities, including childcare or care for other family members. In particular, the Act mitigates the negative effects of career interruptions by regulating the transition to part-time work – referred to as “Brückenteilzeit” – which ensures employees to return to full-time work after fulfilling their long-term care duties. This legislation is harmonized with other key laws, such as the Federal Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act (Bundeselterngeld- und Elternzeitgesetz) (BMFSFJ, 2006a) and the Family Care Hours Act (Pflegezeitgesetz) (BMJ, 2008). Together, these laws complement each other by overlapping benefits, reinforcing employee rights, and offering multiple layers of anti-discrimination protection. In contrast, part-time employment remains less favored in China, where there is a strong preference for “secure” full-time work. This tendency can be attributed largely to the inadequacy of legal protections for part-time workers. The Opinions on Several Issues Concerning Part-time Employment, issued in 2003, first introduced macro-level regulations on part-time employment (MLSS, 2003). These were further detailed at the micro level with the implementation of the Labor Contract Law in 2008 (NPC, 2007). However, compared to full-time employment, part-time work still faces “institutional discrimination”, particularly in areas such as social security contributions and restrictions on overtime work (Dong, 2006). Additionally, employers often favor full-time employees due to concerns related to cost control and management efficiency (Liu et al., 2009). This situation may exacerbate disadvantages for women in their careers, for instance, women of childbearing age are often compelled to completely withdraw from the workforce rather than opting for flexible working arrangements when having children (Yang & Tuo, 2024). Against the backdrop of rapid population aging, scholars have called for reforms to make China’s part-time employment framework more “family-friendly”. Such reforms would involve enabling employees to transition between full-time and part-time roles during life stages such as retirement, child-rearing, or elder care, supported by robust institutional mechanisms (Wang, 2025). Achieving this goal, however, requires comprehensive legal revisions and shifts in societal attitudes.
As previously discussed, institutional support is crucial for the successful implementation of family-friendly corporate policies. Childcare for infants and toddlers remains a key factor influencing family fertility intention. Germany’s family-friendly policies, which started early, are characterized by a well-developed public policy framework (Morgan, 2006), which is reflected not only in legal mandates but also in corporate cost-benefit considerations (Peus, 2006). The Maternity Protection Act (Mutterschutzgesetz 2018) mandates eight weeks of paid leave before and after childbirth, with a 100% salary replacement rate funded jointly by health insurance and employers (BMFSFJ, 2024). This system effectively reduces employer costs while safeguarding the occupational safety and economic rights of pregnant and postpartum women. The Federal Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act allows each parent up to three years of parental leave and includes innovative mechanisms such as “non-transferable partner months” and “partnership bonuses” to encourage fathers’ involvement (BMFSFJ, 2006a). The rate of fathers’ paternity leave usage in Germany increased from 3.5% in 2007 to 46.2% in 2023 (BMFSFJ, 2024b). Furthermore, Germany initiated the “National Quality Initiative for Daycare Centers” in the late 1990s, laying the groundwork for subsequent legislation such as the Daycare Expansion Act (Tagesbetreuungsausbaugesetz) and the Good Childcare Act (Gute-KiTa-Gesetz) (BMFSFJ, 2004, 2019). These developments not only established a relatively mature legal framework but also ensured service quality through coordinated efforts between federal and state governments. In recent years, China has made continuous progress in the legislative and policy frameworks for maternity leave, paternity leave, and childcare. However, it has yet to establish a national statutory paternity and parental leave system; significant disparities among provinces regarding leave duration, cost-sharing, and benefits for fathers and mothers pose challenges for effective policy implementation and monitoring (Yang et al., 2025). The Special Provisions on Labor Protection for Female Employees issued in 2012 stipulate 98 days of maternity leave, with wages during leave paid by maternity insurance (or by employers if not insured), based on pre-maternity wages or local average wages (SC, 2012). However, in practice, women in flexible or freelance jobs are often not covered by maternity insurance and struggle to access maternity leave benefits (Yang et al., 2025). Although the revised Population and Family Planning Law (2021) formally introduced the concept of “parental leave” (NPC, 2021), legal provisions are broadly defined without specifying exact durations, leaving it to provincial governments to detail (most provinces specify 5-15 days of parental leave annually). Regarding childcare, the Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Development of Childcare Services for Children Under 3 Years Old advocate for developing affordable childcare institutions (NHC, 2019). Nevertheless, China’s public childcare service system remains underdevelopment, with issues such as ambiguous definitions, insufficient resource provision, low quality, and uneven development at both national and local levels (Pang, 2021). Despite various time-off support policies, unclear cost-sharing mechanisms hinder effective employee protection (UNICEF, 2022). Only when the Chinese government assumes more responsibility in sharing the costs of maternity leave systems and ensures reasonable cost-sharing between enterprises and families (Yang et al., 2025), can there be positive developments in the effective implementation of family-friendly corporate policies in China.
Even with robust legal and policy frameworks in place, the effective implementation of family-friendly policies may still be hindered by a lack of social recognition and cultural support. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the cultural context of different countries in relation to family-friendliness. Specifically, recognizing the cultural differences between China and Germany is crucial when considering the transferability of the German model to China. In traditional Chinese culture, individuals are not seen as isolated entities but rather as continuations of life. This perspective emphasizes the Confucian notion that “one’s body and hair are gifts from one’s parents”, fostering the value of “kinship affection”, where intergenerational bonds form the core of family relationships. Consequently, Chinese traditional culture prioritizes “love between parents and children” and institutionalizes it as a fundamental social and moral principle. In contrast, European cultures tend to highlight different forms of emotional bonds and ethical values that sustain family life. Theses include Eros, Philia and Agape (Sun & Klammer, 2023), (pp.178-179). Eros refers to passionate and intimate attachment between partners, contributing to emotional stability within the family; Philia emphasizes equality and support among family members, serving as the foundation of family harmony; Agape embodies unconditional love and self-sacrifice, offering families ethical depth and enduring significance (Aristotle, 2009; Lewis, 1998; Plato, 1989; Soble, 1990). These cultural differences are further reflected in how family functions are distributed. In China, families play a central role in child-rearing and intergenerational care, with grandparents often taking primary responsibility for childcare. Conversely, in many European countries, public childcare facilities serve as the mainstay of early childhood education and care, while grandparents typically play a supplementary or occasional role. Similarly, in terms of long-term elder care, European societies tend to rely on professional institutions, whereas in China, this responsibility primarily falls on the family (Sun & Klammer, 2023), (pp.178-179). Despite these deeply rooted cultural values, they are not immutable. Cultural norms can evolve over time, particularly in response to regional disparities and levels of economic development. For example, regions with higher economic development often offer better social security systems and public services, such as high-quality childcare facilities and educational resources, which help alleviate family burdens and promote gender equality. Moreover, in societies with stronger cultural inclinations toward gender equality, there is a greater tendency for household responsibilities to be shared between men and women, making family-friendly policies more readily accepted and effectively utilized.
At the corporate level, factors such as corporate culture, industry characteristics, and the size of the company influence firms’ willingness to provide family-friendly policies to their employees and the effectiveness of their implementation (Gray & Tudball, 2003; Perry-Smith & Blum, 2000).
Importantly, Germany’s union system plays a pivotal role in advocating for legislative reforms, assisting employees in exercising their existing rights, and negotiating for broader workplace practices that support work-life balance (Budd & Mumford, 2004). We do not consider unions as part of the company, but emphasize the interactive role between unions and companies in promoting family-friendly policies. When considering the transferability of the German model to China, it is essential to recognize the differences in union organizational structures and operational models between the two countries. In Germany, unions are primarily responsible for setting regional and national industry wage standards, while works councils typically handle negotiations on specific workplace practices, including facilitating company-level agreements to create family-supportive work environments (Hübler & Jirjahn, 2003). The German union system operates with considerable independence. In contrast, the Chinese union system is largely centralized and consists primarily of the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) and its subordinate organizations. These entities operate under government guidance and function more as an extension of the state administrative apparatus (Wu, 2024). The Trade Union Law of the People’s Republic of China (NPC, 2001) clearly defines the task of trade unions in safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of employees. In recent years, the Chinese government has increasingly emphasized the construction of family-friendly policies and encouraged unions to play a more significant role in this process. However, compared to Germany, Chinese unions have relatively limited independence and autonomy, which may restrict their effectiveness in promoting family-friendly policies.
The importance of corporate culture in effectively implementing family-friendly policies cannot be overlooked. Studies in both China and Germany highlight that companies should strive to build a culture inclusive of gender equality concepts and ensure employees feel substantial support through a coherent organizational culture, leaders who focus on family issues play a central role in this process (Flüch & Stettes, 2013; Hammermann & Stettes, 2016; Jiang, 2007). Research indicates that the percentage of companies with a distinctly family-friendly corporate culture has increased since 2015, both from a company and employee perspective, but there remains a gap between the family-friendliness companies intend to achieve and what employees actually experience (Hammermann et al., 2019). Closing this gap hinges on effective internal communication and leadership support (Hammermann et al., 2019). In China, corporate culture has always been seen as a crucial driver for enhancing competitiveness. It influences not only brand image and internal cohesion but also directly impacts strategic positioning, managerial efficiency, and market competitiveness (Jiang, 2025). With recent progress in legislation protecting women’s rights and promoting family-friendly measures, public concern over the “motherhood penalty” continues to grow (Yang & He, 2022). It’s emphasized that without supportive family-friendly environments – both within corporations and across society – the gap between women’s legal status and their actual status will remain difficult to bridge (Liu, 2022). Chinese scholars particularly highlight the interaction between corporate and social cultures, arguing that companies must take a leading role in fostering family-friendly corporate cultures to ensure statutory systems are effectively utilized, while society establishes the appropriate cultural foundations to promote corporate social responsibility (Jiang, 2025). Although Chinese academia has identified various types of corporate cultures (Jiang, 2025), it has yet to offer a clear and widely accepted definition of “family-friendly corporate culture”. In contrast, German scholars have proposed a well-developed conceptual framework for “family-friendly corporate culture” (Flüch & Stettes, 2013), which provides a basis for measuring perceptions in the workplace. Subsequent research has further developed and refined this concept (Hammermann et al., 2019).
The effectiveness of family-friendly corporate policies is also influenced by the size of companies. Large companies generally have more resources for implementing and supporting family-friendly policies, making it easier for them to offer benefits such as parental leave, flexible working hours, or remote work options. Additionally, they are more likely to have dedicated human resources departments responsible for planning, executing, and monitoring the implementation of these policies (Ingram & Simons, 1995; Poelmans et al., 2003b). The present study also suggests that larger companies are more likely to meet the criteria for family-friendly certification and obtain accreditation. However, studies also show that small companies tend to exhibit a family-oriented mindset (Gerlach et al., 2011). In smaller companies, relationships among employees are often closer, and communication between management and staff is more direct. This environment can lead to less cultural resistance when implementing family-friendly policies and allows for more tailored solutions to specific employee needs. According to our interviews with German human resource managers, the implementation costs of providing, for example, day-care centers or elder care support are high for small firms, whereas relatively low-cost flexible work arrangements are more acceptable. Moreover, small companies do not usually institutionalize family-friendly measures or pay for certification. Therefore, when considering the application of family-friendly models in China, large companies remain the most suitable candidates for pilot programs, while small companies still face greater financial pressure to promote such policies.
Industry characteristics also impact the willingness and effectiveness with which companies adopt and implement family-friendly policies. For instance, labor-intensive industries such as manufacturing may encounter more challenges in implementing family-friendly policies due to the nature of their operations. Jobs on production lines are difficult to make fully flexible. However, a German human resource manager noted that it is important to distinguish between different departments within manufacturing companies. While achieving full flexibility on the production line can be challenging, innovative management practices such as “shift work” are increasingly being adopted to mitigate these issues. Beyond time-based flexibility, companies can also support workers through monetary investments and infrastructure development to implement family-friendly measures. In contrast, knowledge-intensive industries like financial and insurance services are better suited to adopt flexible working arrangements. Many tasks in these sectors can be performed from any location, providing a natural advantage for family-friendly policies. The COVID-19 pandemic has also brought greater attention to the need and urgency of providing family-friendly support to workers in health and social services (Robinson et al., 2021). There is an assumption that industries with a higher proportion of female employees might prompt company management to provide more supportive measures (Poelmans et al., 2003a). A similar trend is observed in China, where some textile factories have introduced “Mom Shifts”, allowing female workers to work during school hours and take care of their children before and after school. The textile and apparel industry employs approximately 20 million people, over 60% of whom are women, predominantly migrant workers of childbearing age (CINIC, 2024).
At the individual level, the effectiveness of family-friendly policies hinges on two key factors: adequately addressing employee needs during the policy formulation stage and actively encouraging the utilization of these policies during the implementation phase. When considering the application of the German model to China, it is essential to take into account local attitudes, perceptions, and needs regarding such policies (Allen, 2001; Lambert, 2000).
Chinese perceptions of family and work are shaped not only by traditional culture but also by broader socioeconomic changes, resulting in notable generational differences (Guan et al., 2023). In the early years of the People’s Republic of China, the state-provided employment was seen as a key pillar of the Chinese version of socialism (Tang & Parish, 2000). Individuals born in the 1950s and 1960s generally did not face job insecurity and therefore did not prioritize career advancement as their primary pursuit. The subsequent Reform and Opening-up policy brought about profound changes in China’s economic and social structures, which in turn triggered significant shifts in societal values. Among the post-1980s generation, there has been a growing emphasis on work-family balance (Bianchi, 2020; Gao et al., 2022). Since the establishment of the market economy system in 1992, rapid economic growth has significantly improved living standards for younger generations. As a result, members of the post-1990s cohort tend to place greater importance on family life and personal development compared to previous generations, reflecting a new lifestyle orientation and an evolving value system for some segments of society.
The changing needs of Chinese across different life stages influence their attitudes toward work-family balance (Zacher & Froidevaux, 2021). During the early career phase – typically before the age of 35 – when individuals enter the workforce but have not yet started families, work often appears less central, as many young people tend to prioritize autonomy and personal development (Jin & Rounds, 2012). However, after starting a family, individuals become more focused on material goals such as financial stability and job security, driven by the dual demands of supporting their families and achieving personal fulfillment. By the time they reach a certain level of financial and professional stability (around 45 years of age), their motivation related to work and material success tends to decline, and greater emphasis is placed on family life (Kooij et al., 2011). Therefore, the effective implementation of family-friendly corporate policies in China should also take into account the employees at different life stages in the same company and their differentiated needs to avoid intergenerational conflicts.
The differentiated need for work-family balance in China is also evident across gender and region. According to a UNICEF survey, working mothers with children aged 0-2 years have a particularly high demand for family-friendly policies in the workplace (UNICEF, 2022). An empirical study based on data from the 2020 China Family Panel Study (CFPS) further illustrates this gender dimension: husbands’ involvement in childcare promotes women’s employment by reducing the time women spend on household tasks and childcare; the effect of husbands’ involvement in childcare on women’s employment is more pronounced among women with two children than among women with one child (Mao & Wan, 2024). Regionally, the rapid process of urbanization has increased population mobility, and changes in the social environment – particularly in housing conditions – have contributed to shifts in perceptions of family structures (Xie & Wang, 2021). According to survey findings, mobile populations have a greater need for policies supporting flexible working arrangements compared to local employees (UNICEF, 2022). This may be because mobile workers and their family members often live in different cities, making them prefer flexible working arrangements to better care for their family members.
The cost of childcare is a critical factor that significantly influences an individuals’ willingness to have children and their demand for family-friendly measures. According to the Report on the cost of childbirth in China 2024, when comparing the total cost of raising a child from birth to 18 years old with the per capita GDP, Germany has a multiplier of 3.64, whereas China’s multiplier is as high as 6.9, which is almost the highest level globally (Liang et al., 2024). China’s nine-year compulsory education system, which has been in place since 1986 (NPC, 1986), has played an important role in alleviating the financial and time costs of raising children for families. In recent years, childcare services in China have continued to improve. By the end of 2023, the country had achieved an average of 3.38 spaces per 1,000 people nationwide, with a total of 4.77 million spaces. The government aims to achieve the target of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 people by the end of 2025. However, regional disparities remain significant, with public childcare centers more prevalent in urban areas than in rural areas (Lei, 2023). In addition, China’s school system typically provides half-day care for younger children. While full-day childcare options are becoming increasingly available — particularly in urban areas where dual-income households are more common — these services can be costly. As a result, many families rely heavily on grandparents or choose to have one parent stay at home to provide care. In cultures and regions dominated by traditional gender roles, high childcare costs and difficulties accessing affordable, high-quality childcare can discourage women from returning to work after giving birth, forcing families back into the traditional model.
When examining how to adapt and apply German experiences in the effective implementation of family-friendly corporate policies within the Chinese context, it is essential to consider the various influencing factors across the three dimensions previously discussed. Equally important is recognizing the significant social, economic, and cultural differences that exist across different regions within China. Given these considerations, we summarize several general recommendations applicable to the Chinese context below:
First, Chinese policymakers and researchers should move beyond a purely “fertility-friendly” approach and adopt a more comprehensive, life cycle-oriented, and gender-equitable “family-friendly” policy framework. This conceptual shift aims to address the diverse needs of various family structures across different life stages, while also recognizing the distinct requirements of individuals based on gender and generational roles. Only through such a holistic approach can families be fundamentally supported, particularly in decisions related to childbearing and childrearing. Currently, China’s family-friendly policies are in their early stages, mainly focused on “maternity support”, emphasizing parenting or post-parental leave support for mothers. Although some recent initiatives encourage employers to consider time off for new fathers and families’ economic needs, there is still a gap in achieving a balance between paid work and other responsibilities for men and women at different times of their lives. The German experience highlights the importance of “father-friendly” policies but also reveals challenges in putting these into practice. Chinese policymakers should take timely action to integrate the principle of “father-friendliness” into family-friendly policymaking, public awareness campaigns, employer engagement, and public service provision. Specifically, “father-friendly” policies should cover all life stages, from entering the workforce to a partner’s pregnancy, newborn care, and return to work after parental leave, ensuring equal access to family responsibilities and career development opportunities for both genders. Moreover, considering China’s accelerating population aging, a life-cycle approach can also effectively address the needs of older employees. With the 13th National People’s Congress Fourth Session (2021) proposing a gradual increase in the statutory retirement age, policies should pay more attention to employees in transition and retirement phases to better balance work and caregiving responsibilities.
Second, the development of a unified certification standard for family-friendly companies in China is both urgent and feasible. In 2022, the Shanghai Municipal Women’s Federation proposed establishing a certification standard for family-friendly companies in Shanghai (hereinafter referred to as “the Proposal”) (Ding, 2022). This marked the first time that the concept of “family-friendly companies” was formally introduced into China’s political discourse, reflecting proactive local government efforts in this area, though at a preliminary stage. Germany’s well-developed auditing and certification mechanisms offer a reference mode for China. First, the Proposal suggests that the certification standards should reflect differences based on industry type and company size. Empirical findings from Germany show that certified family-friendly companies vary significantly across sectors and scales, indicating that these factors could be prioritized in China’s pilot programs. Furthermore, for nationwide implementation, it is essential to consider regional disparities alongside industry and size. A national-level minimum requirement should be established, allowing local governments and businesses flexibility in adapting implementation strategies to their specific contexts. Second, the Proposal outlines certification criteria that primarily include flexible work arrangements, leave and care services, financial subsidies, employment protection, environmental facilities, and other support services. However, these elements lack systematicity. The classification framework for action areas proposed in this paper not only encompasses the aforementioned components but also provides a structured foundation for the design of comprehensive certification standards. These categorized measures can serve as a “toolbox”, enabling Chinese enterprises to select and implement policies tailored to their organizational characteristics. Third, while the Proposal emphasizes how the government can incentivize family-friendly companies through tax reductions, employment subsidies, and awards, it does not sufficiently address how companies themselves can directly support employees. This reflects a reality in China: because the labor market is still benefiting from a “demographic dividend”, companies lack intrinsic motivation and need the government to play a more active role. Therefore, China could adopt Germany’s non-governmental third-party certification model, but the process should be led by central and local labor and commerce authorities, with the establishment of specialized audit and certification bodies involving representatives from academia, media, and the business community to ensure standardization and transparency. Lastly, merely offering potentially family-friendly measures is insufficient to guarantee their effectiveness. It is essential to monitor and evaluate the accessibility and availability of these measures for all employees.
Turning to the roles of government and business in institutionalizing family-friendly practices, Germany has a longer history of policy development in this area. Generally, the primary drivers of family-friendly policies still originate at the governmental level, with businesses acting as participants and partners (Klammer & Letablier, 2007). Since the second term of the SDP-Green coalition government (2002-2005), there has been an emphasis on involving other actors in helping to build a more family-friendly society. The “Family Alliance” initiative launched by the SDP-Green coalition government in 2003 is one manifestation of this new policy direction. Its goal is to build a new consensus among different societal protagonists on the importance of the family for societal well-being and to raise awareness of the need to support families. In parallel, the BMFSFJ – in cooperation with the Bertelsmann Foundation – launched the “Local Family Coalitions” project in 2003. Based on the assumption that the local environment plays a crucial role in shaping family living conditions and quality of life, this initiative brought together relevant local stakeholders to improve the municipal living environment for families and to promote family-friendly practices at the community level. To support these coalitions, the BMFSFJ established service centers to provide advice, training, and on-site workshops to facilitate the exchange of experiences and cooperation among local coalitions and form a nationwide support network. The entire program is empirically evaluated by the German Institute for Youth (DJI) to ensure the effectiveness and continuous improvement of policy implementation. After the revised Works Constitution Act (BetrVG) included the goal of reconciling work and family life in 2001, this topic became the focus of discussions within many companies (Klenner, 2004). Research has suggested that family-friendly measures at the company level are not only a cost factor but can also bring economic benefits to companies (Juncke, 2005; Prognos, 2003). As a result, firms have made voluntary commitments through collective bargaining and developed family-friendly agreements.
In contrast to Germany, China is a relative latecomer in the development of family-friendly policies and has yet to establish a comprehensive model that combines strong government leadership with collaborative efforts from other social actors. China’s labor shortage exhibits regional and sectoral variations, and corporate commitment to family-friendly practices remains heavily influenced by macroeconomic conditions. During periods of economic downturn, companies tend to prioritize cost reduction over investing in employee-centered family support measures. Given the “inclusiveness, universality, and basic needs welfare” nature of China’s social policies (Guan, 2022) and the evident gap between corporate provision and employee expectations, we argue that the Chinese government must assume a more proactive role here. Although the Chinese government has provided policy and legal support for building family-friendly workplaces in terms of time, services, and funding, implementation is not yet satisfactory. For example, there is currently no clear cost-sharing mechanism for maternity allowances during statutory maternity leave, due to inconsistent implementation standards across provinces. This lack of uniformity results in inadequate protection of employees’ rights and interests. Similarly, the introduction of creches for infants and toddlers under three and inclusive childcare facilities has been slow and remains limited in scale. Policy guidance, incentives, and support mechanisms designed to encourage employers to establish such services are still underdeveloped. Current tax incentives and exemptions are insufficient to offset the high costs of childcare (UNICEF, 2022). It is therefore necessary for the Chinese government to improve the legislative basis while clarifying policy guidance, incentives, and support mechanisms for companies. Additionally, increased oversight is needed to ensure that companies comply with minimum welfare obligations. At the same time, the government should encourage enterprises to go beyond legal minimums by drawing on successful models such as Germany’s multi-stakeholder collaboration approach.
From the perspective of MFE theory, achieving a high level of gender equality while respecting corporate autonomy is a dynamic and complex process. For companies, adopting family-friendly practices in response to external shocks is an important step, such as societal changes, mandatory policies and laws, as well as government fiscal incentives. However, the determining factor lies in whether corporate leaders have a strong commitment to gender equality and family-friendliness values, and whether they can internalize these principles as part of their corporate cultures. Although such commitment largely depends on managers’ subjective motivations, governments can still play a facilitating role by promoting progress through certification programs and reward systems, building partnerships with businesses, offering leadership training, enhancing corporate social images, and recognizing socially responsible entrepreneurs. Internally, the successful experiences of certified German companies in cultivating family-friendly cultures and management provide valuable models for Chinese companies.
This study also has limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sample of companies included in the analysis is not quantitatively representative. Moreover, the certification process involves costs, which may lead to a selection bias. Second, this paper proposes a classification scheme for action areas for family-friendly companies, which can serve as a reference for Chinese policymakers. However, the successful adoption and sustainability of family-friendly practices depend on broader institutional factors, including policy acceptance, implementation, and evaluation at multiple governance levels. Issues related to institutional responsibilities, control mechanisms, legal regulations, and financial management (Khan et al., 2024) are critical determinants of effective and enduring family-friendly corporate development in China. Further research is needed to explore these dimensions in greater depth. Third, existing studies have argued that employees and employers in the public and private sectors have differentiated characteristics (Agarwal & Sajid, 2017; Bellante & Link, 1981), which may lead to different family-friendly profiles in the two sectors. However, due to sample constraints, this paper does not examine certified family-friendly employers in the public and private sector. Specifically, within the “company” category, although the majority of employers are from the private sector (about 56%), the category also includes entities from the public sector (e.g., federal and local government corporations) and mixed-ownership organizations (e.g., cooperatives and church corporations). In contrast, the “university” and “institution” categories predominantly consist of organizations with public-sector characteristics (the exact proportions of which require further statistical analysis), but these were beyond the scope of the present study. Therefore, relying solely on the “company” category for comparing public and private sectors may introduce bias. Such an approach could fail to capture the complexities within the “company” category and could overlook the typical public-sector employers represented in the “university” and “institution” categories. Future research should therefore include all three categories in order to provide a more comprehensive survey of the family-friendliness of certified employers in both the public and private sector. Additionally, further investigation into employers with hybrid or mixed organizational structures is also warranted.
