Flexible lives: spatial, temporal, and behavioural boundaries in a fluid world of work and home

IF 1.2 4区 管理学 Q4 MANAGEMENT Culture and Organization Pub Date : 2023-08-08 DOI:10.1080/14759551.2023.2211375
Special Issue editors, M. Izak, Stefaine Reissner, H. Shortt
{"title":"Flexible lives: spatial, temporal, and behavioural boundaries in a fluid world of work and home","authors":"Special Issue editors, M. Izak, Stefaine Reissner, H. Shortt","doi":"10.1080/14759551.2023.2211375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The world of work and home has become increasingly fluid (Bauman 2000), due to an increase in flexible working. Work has become decoupled from time and space (Gajendran and Harrison 2007), making it increasingly common for knowledge-based workers to work at different times and in multiple spaces across a working day or week (Duxbury et al. 2014; Sewell and Taskin 2015; Kingma 2016). The Covid-19 pandemic in particular has been a catalyst for questioning accepted norms of where, when, and how work takes place and has encouragedmany to experiment with new ways of working at spatio-temporal distance from a regular workplace (Gandini and Garavaglia 2023). This reshaping of traditional modes of working has had a significant effect on working patterns, social workplace interactions, personal relationships, and the boundaries between familial and working lives, which we seek to explore in this Special Issue. For many years, an increase in flexible working has reshaped traditional modes of working, both infringing on traditional associations between a place of work and its content and reorienting the spatial, temporal, and behavioural boundaries between work and non-work (Ashforth, Kreiner, and Fugate 2000). According to Basile and Beauregard (2021), technology has played a central part in these changes as we ‘feel compelled to stay “switched on” to work’ (36). As a result, the use of time, space, and objects in demarcating the work-nonwork boundary has become more flexible and fluid (Reissner, Izak, and Hislop 2021; Izak, Shortt, and Case 2022) than traditionally assumed. During the Covid-19 pandemic, working from home crossed the work-nonwork boundary frequently to attend to both professional and family roles. Largely fixed work schedules commonly led to struggles to fulfil this multitude of commitments (Adisa et al. 2022). An increase in remote and hybrid forms of working, which has been associated with an increase of labour productivity (Office for National Statistics 2022), and which is bound to continue (World Economic Forum 2020), has further highlighted spatial, social, and temporal shifts in our understanding of community at work (Spinuzzi et al. 2019; Garrett, Spreitzer, and Bacevice 2017), as well as the embodied practices of workers (de Vaujany and Aroles 2019). Specifically, there has been a trend towards individualization of working patterns as a result of flexible working, which may weaken the fabric of social relationships at work (Ajzen and Taskin 2021). If excessive, this trend may affect our sense of belonging (Vine, this issue). However, if the right balance is achieved, individualization may increase the collaborative capabilities of many organizations by, for example, enabling speedier teamwork or supporting the facilitation of employees who feel less comfortable interacting during face-to-face meetings (Farragher 2022, 35). Yet this still changes the landscape for how and where we work in this Covid-emergent world. For example, many organizations have started re-thinking and re-writing their flexible working policies in light of the pandemic, whilst acknowledging how flexible working (particularly in relation to the choices we make about where we work) impacts employee well-being, health, those employees home-working in rural areas, those employees home-working whilst living with different generations (Chennangodu and Rajendra, this issue), and the different experiences of men and women (Marra 2023).","PeriodicalId":10824,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Organization","volume":"29 1","pages":"375 - 379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2023.2211375","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The world of work and home has become increasingly fluid (Bauman 2000), due to an increase in flexible working. Work has become decoupled from time and space (Gajendran and Harrison 2007), making it increasingly common for knowledge-based workers to work at different times and in multiple spaces across a working day or week (Duxbury et al. 2014; Sewell and Taskin 2015; Kingma 2016). The Covid-19 pandemic in particular has been a catalyst for questioning accepted norms of where, when, and how work takes place and has encouragedmany to experiment with new ways of working at spatio-temporal distance from a regular workplace (Gandini and Garavaglia 2023). This reshaping of traditional modes of working has had a significant effect on working patterns, social workplace interactions, personal relationships, and the boundaries between familial and working lives, which we seek to explore in this Special Issue. For many years, an increase in flexible working has reshaped traditional modes of working, both infringing on traditional associations between a place of work and its content and reorienting the spatial, temporal, and behavioural boundaries between work and non-work (Ashforth, Kreiner, and Fugate 2000). According to Basile and Beauregard (2021), technology has played a central part in these changes as we ‘feel compelled to stay “switched on” to work’ (36). As a result, the use of time, space, and objects in demarcating the work-nonwork boundary has become more flexible and fluid (Reissner, Izak, and Hislop 2021; Izak, Shortt, and Case 2022) than traditionally assumed. During the Covid-19 pandemic, working from home crossed the work-nonwork boundary frequently to attend to both professional and family roles. Largely fixed work schedules commonly led to struggles to fulfil this multitude of commitments (Adisa et al. 2022). An increase in remote and hybrid forms of working, which has been associated with an increase of labour productivity (Office for National Statistics 2022), and which is bound to continue (World Economic Forum 2020), has further highlighted spatial, social, and temporal shifts in our understanding of community at work (Spinuzzi et al. 2019; Garrett, Spreitzer, and Bacevice 2017), as well as the embodied practices of workers (de Vaujany and Aroles 2019). Specifically, there has been a trend towards individualization of working patterns as a result of flexible working, which may weaken the fabric of social relationships at work (Ajzen and Taskin 2021). If excessive, this trend may affect our sense of belonging (Vine, this issue). However, if the right balance is achieved, individualization may increase the collaborative capabilities of many organizations by, for example, enabling speedier teamwork or supporting the facilitation of employees who feel less comfortable interacting during face-to-face meetings (Farragher 2022, 35). Yet this still changes the landscape for how and where we work in this Covid-emergent world. For example, many organizations have started re-thinking and re-writing their flexible working policies in light of the pandemic, whilst acknowledging how flexible working (particularly in relation to the choices we make about where we work) impacts employee well-being, health, those employees home-working in rural areas, those employees home-working whilst living with different generations (Chennangodu and Rajendra, this issue), and the different experiences of men and women (Marra 2023).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
灵活的生活:工作和家庭的流动世界中的空间、时间和行为边界
由于弹性工作的增加,工作和家庭的世界变得越来越不稳定(Bauman 2000)。工作已经与时间和空间脱钩(Gajendran和Harrison,2007年),这使得知识型员工在一个工作日或一周的不同时间和多个空间工作变得越来越普遍(Duxbury等人,2014;Sewell和Taskin 2015;Kingma,2016年)。特别是新冠肺炎大流行,引发了人们对工作地点、时间和方式的公认规范的质疑,并鼓励人们尝试在与常规工作场所保持时空距离的新工作方式(Gandini和Garavaglia 2023)。这种对传统工作模式的重塑对工作模式、工作场所的社交互动、个人关系以及家庭和工作生活之间的界限产生了重大影响,我们将在本期特刊中对此进行探讨。多年来,弹性工作的增加重塑了传统的工作模式,既侵犯了工作场所及其内容之间的传统联系,又重新调整了工作与非工作之间的空间、时间和行为界限(Ashforth、Kreiner和Fugate,2000年)。根据Basile和Beaurered(2021)的说法,技术在这些变化中发挥了核心作用,因为我们“感到不得不保持“开机”工作”(36)。因此,在划定工作-非工作边界时使用时间、空间和物体变得比传统假设更灵活、更流畅(Reissner、Izak和Hislop 2021;Izak、Shortt和Case 2022)。在新冠肺炎大流行期间,在家工作经常跨越工作与非工作的界限,兼顾职业和家庭角色。固定的工作时间表通常会导致难以履行这些承诺(Adisa等人,2022)。远程和混合工作形式的增加与劳动生产率的提高有关(国家统计局2022),而且这种情况势必会继续下去(世界经济论坛2020),这进一步突出了我们对工作中社区的理解在空间、社会和时间上的转变(Spinuzzi等人,2019;Garrett、Spreitzer和Bacevice 2017),以及工人的具体实践(de Vaujany和Aroles 2019)。具体而言,由于弹性工作,工作模式出现了个性化的趋势,这可能会削弱工作中的社会关系结构(Ajzen和Taskin 2021)。如果过度,这种趋势可能会影响我们的归属感(Vine,本期)。然而,如果实现了正确的平衡,个性化可能会提高许多组织的协作能力,例如,通过加快团队合作或支持在面对面会议期间感到不太舒服的员工进行互动(Farragher 2022,35)。然而,这仍然改变了我们在这个新冠肺炎合并世界中的工作方式和地点。例如,鉴于疫情,许多组织已经开始重新思考和重新制定他们的灵活工作政策,同时承认灵活工作(特别是与我们对工作地点的选择有关)如何影响员工的福祉、健康、那些在农村地区在家工作的员工,这些员工在家工作,同时与不同的世代生活在一起(Chennangodu和Rajendra,本期),以及男性和女性的不同经历(Marra 2023)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Culture and Organization was founded in 1995 as Studies in Cultures, Organizations and Societies . It represents the intersection of academic disciplines that have developed distinct qualitative, empirical and theoretical vocabularies to research organization, culture and related social phenomena. Culture and Organization features refereed articles that offer innovative insights and provoke discussion. It particularly offers papers which employ ethnographic, critical and interpretive approaches, as practised in such disciplines as organizational, communication, media and cultural studies, which go beyond description and use data to advance theoretical reflection. The Journal also presents papers which advance our conceptual understanding of organizational phenomena. Culture and Organization features refereed articles that offer innovative insights and provoke discussion. It particularly offers papers which employ ethnographic, critical and interpretive approaches, as practised in such disciplines as communication, media and cultural studies, which go beyond description and use data to advance theoretical reflection. The journal also presents papers which advance our conceptual understand-ing of organizational phenomena.
期刊最新文献
Speaking as the Other: A polyvocal account of precarity and performativity Pieces of me, letters from us: collage-making as embodied reflection in autoethnography True encounters with the fictional university: collectively rewriting the script of filmic dark academia from the academic margins A break room as spatial and material order for interaction In choppy waters with a critical friend: the benefits of intimate reflexive encounters in participatory action research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1