Examining employee experiences of hybrid work: an ecological approach

IF 3.3 3区 管理学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Personnel Review Pub Date : 2023-08-29 DOI:10.1108/pr-03-2023-0222
Mendiola Teng‐Calleja, Ma. Tonirose de Guzman Mactal, Jaimee Felice Caringal-Go
{"title":"Examining employee experiences of hybrid work: an ecological approach","authors":"Mendiola Teng‐Calleja, Ma. Tonirose de Guzman Mactal, Jaimee Felice Caringal-Go","doi":"10.1108/pr-03-2023-0222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the various forms of organizational and team-level actions that were perceived to be helpful or not helpful by employees as they navigate the hybrid work arrangements and how these had an impact on their work behaviors and experiences. This research utilized Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory as framework.Design/methodology/approachThe exploratory study used a qualitative approach in gathering data via online survey from a total of 45 Filipino employees working in a hybrid work arrangement for at least three months. The analysis utilized both inductive and deductive methodologies in examining the data. Inductive thematic analysis was used in coding the data based on the participants' responses, while the deductive approach ensured that the themes are aligned with the research questions and reflect the different systems within Bronfenbrenner's EST (1986).FindingsResults surfaced helpful organizational (e.g. provision of work tools, financial assistance, supportive policies and engagement and wellness initiatives) and team level actions (i.e. use of technology-based communication tools, open virtual door policy, effective performance management system, employee care practices and team engagement activities). Actions that were perceived as not helpful include inadequate technological infrastructure, poor communication, insufficient training, punitive policies/practices and leadership issues at the organizational level as well as unresponsive colleagues and ineffective implementation of policies/processes at the level of teams. Employees reported being able to build on savings, becoming more productive and having greater work–life balance amid hybrid work. However, they continue to be challenged by blurred boundaries and inability to disconnect from work similar to when work was done remotely and now with sustaining momentum given the shifts on where they do their work.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study may guide programs and initiatives of human resource management practitioners and organizational leaders as they support employees in navigating through hybrid work.Originality/valueThe research expands extant knowledge on practices and experiences in hybrid work (Gifford, 2022). It also contributes to studies on human resource management that are nuanced based on where work is performed (Ng and Stanton, 2023) or with emerging work arrangements.","PeriodicalId":48148,"journal":{"name":"Personnel Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personnel Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-03-2023-0222","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the various forms of organizational and team-level actions that were perceived to be helpful or not helpful by employees as they navigate the hybrid work arrangements and how these had an impact on their work behaviors and experiences. This research utilized Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory as framework.Design/methodology/approachThe exploratory study used a qualitative approach in gathering data via online survey from a total of 45 Filipino employees working in a hybrid work arrangement for at least three months. The analysis utilized both inductive and deductive methodologies in examining the data. Inductive thematic analysis was used in coding the data based on the participants' responses, while the deductive approach ensured that the themes are aligned with the research questions and reflect the different systems within Bronfenbrenner's EST (1986).FindingsResults surfaced helpful organizational (e.g. provision of work tools, financial assistance, supportive policies and engagement and wellness initiatives) and team level actions (i.e. use of technology-based communication tools, open virtual door policy, effective performance management system, employee care practices and team engagement activities). Actions that were perceived as not helpful include inadequate technological infrastructure, poor communication, insufficient training, punitive policies/practices and leadership issues at the organizational level as well as unresponsive colleagues and ineffective implementation of policies/processes at the level of teams. Employees reported being able to build on savings, becoming more productive and having greater work–life balance amid hybrid work. However, they continue to be challenged by blurred boundaries and inability to disconnect from work similar to when work was done remotely and now with sustaining momentum given the shifts on where they do their work.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study may guide programs and initiatives of human resource management practitioners and organizational leaders as they support employees in navigating through hybrid work.Originality/valueThe research expands extant knowledge on practices and experiences in hybrid work (Gifford, 2022). It also contributes to studies on human resource management that are nuanced based on where work is performed (Ng and Stanton, 2023) or with emerging work arrangements.
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
考察员工对混合工作的体验:一种生态方法
本文的目的是探讨各种形式的组织和团队层面的行动,被认为是有帮助或没有帮助的员工,因为他们导航的混合工作安排,以及这些如何对他们的工作行为和经验的影响。本研究以布朗芬布伦纳的生态系统理论为框架。设计/方法/方法探索性研究采用定性方法,通过在线调查从45名在混合工作安排中工作至少三个月的菲律宾员工中收集数据。分析在检查数据时使用了归纳和演绎的方法。归纳主题分析用于根据参与者的回答对数据进行编码,而演绎方法确保主题与研究问题保持一致,并反映了Bronfenbrenner的EST(1986)中的不同系统。结果显示了有益的组织(如提供工作工具、财政援助、支持性政策、参与和健康计划)和团队层面的行动(如使用基于技术的沟通工具、开放虚拟门政策、有效的绩效管理系统、员工关怀实践和团队参与活动)。被认为没有帮助的行动包括技术基础设施不足、沟通不良、培训不足、组织层面的惩罚性政策/做法和领导问题,以及团队层面的同事反应迟钝和政策/流程的无效实施。员工们报告说,在混合型工作中,他们可以节省开支,提高工作效率,更好地平衡工作与生活。然而,他们仍然受到界限模糊和无法脱离工作的挑战,类似于远程完成工作时的情况,而现在由于工作地点的变化,他们的工作势头持续下去。实践意义本研究的发现可以指导人力资源管理从业者和组织领导者的计划和举措,以支持员工在混合工作中导航。独创性/价值该研究扩展了关于混合工作实践和经验的现有知识(Gifford, 2022)。它还有助于对人力资源管理的研究,这些研究根据工作地点(Ng和Stanton, 2023)或新出现的工作安排而有所不同。
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
Personnel Review
Personnel Review Multiple-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Personnel Review (PR) publishes rigorous, well written articles from a range of theoretical and methodological traditions. We value articles that have high originality and that engage with contemporary challenges to human resource management theory, policy and practice development. Research that highlights innovation and emerging issues in the field, and the medium- to long-term impact of HRM policy and practice, is especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Getting along and getting ahead: voice trails of status pursuit Exploring local job seekers perception toward employment in the private and public sectors in Qatar: implications for workforce nationalization policies Adoption of competence management practices by industries in an emerging country: an analysis via fuzzy TOPSIS Examining employee experiences of hybrid work: an ecological approach What is in your résumé? The effects of multiple social categories in résumé screening
×
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