Abstract
This paper challenges a popular assumption that organizations with flexible work arrangements are more attractive to job seekers than those with a standard work arrangement. Drawing on boundary theory, we suggest that the attractiveness of these arrangements depends in part on job seekers' interrole conflict. Subjects were 142 MBA students at a midsized midwestern university. Those with high role conflict were more attracted to an organization when flextime was offered than when it was not. Those with low role conflict, however, were just slightly less attracted to an organization when flextime was offered. Conversely, subjects with low role conflict were more attracted to an organization when telecommuting was offered than when it was not; subjects with high role conflict were indifferent. These results suggest that organizations should understand the needs of their targeted applicant pool and carefully consider recruitment implications of work arrangements when analyzing costs associated with these policies.