远程与混合办公模式对组织绩效及员工幸福感的影响研究综述

深度研究匿名用户发表于 2026年05月06日 20:1721阅读

内容由 AI 生成，仅供参考，请仔细甄别

参考文献

7COVID‐19 and the New Technologies of Organizing: Digital Exhaust, Digital Footprints, and Artificial Intelligence in the Wake of Remote WorkOpenAlex

Paul M. Leonardi

Companies have flirted with remote work since the 1970s. Estimates from late 2019 suggested that slightly more than 5 per cent of employees worked remotely with regularity. But as COVID-19 has spread across the globe over the past few months, and shelter-in-place orders were issued by governments, many companies have initiated a rapid and wholesale shift to remote work arrangements, at least for knowledge-intensive work. This shift is enabled by digital technologies that allow workers to communicate via text, audio, and video and to share and edit data and documents in real-time. As examples of the dramatic and swift increase in remote work enabled by digital technologies, Zoom’s daily active user base grew by 67 per cent in March 2020, the number of daily active users of Microsoft Teams grew from 20 million in November 2019 to 44 million in March 2020, and Slack added 7,000 new paid customers in February and March, 2020 – roughly 40 per cent more than in each of its previous two quarters. Google announced it will continue remote work until at least summer 2021 and Twitter extended the opportunity for all employees to work remotely indefinitely. Most discussions around this shift to remote work have focused on exploring first-order effects – areas of organizational behaviour that are likely to change directly following a transition to working exclusively through digital technologies. Although first-order effects are important, it is the second-order effects of remote working that have the potential to be the most profound, but are the most understudied. In this paper, I explore three of the most important second-order effects likely to shape the trajectory of work for several decades: (1) Remote work creates vast amounts of digital exhaust, (2) Digital exhaust is used to turn employees into data representations, and (3) Artificial intelligence (AI) uses those data representations to predict (and shape) employee behaviour. Increases in the use of digital technologies produces corresponding increases in the amount of work that is recorded and stored. Every time employees send each other emails via Outlook, message each other on Slack, initiate a video conference in Zoom, like someone’s post on Jive, form a team in Microsoft Teams, or assign someone to project milestones in Trello, these digital technologies record that action as meta-data. Whereas most office-based employees conduct slightly more than 50 per cent of their communications through digital channels, record roughly 25 per cent of their meetings, or document how they approached a particular work task some 10 per cent of the time (all figures according to my own research), remote workers in the age of COVID-19 are conducting nearly ALL of these activities through digital technologies that create time-stamped logs of their behaviour. These meta-data are digital exhaust. Logs of employee behaviour are called digital exhaust because they are by-products of other activities, like setting up a meeting or running calculations. Although the term ‘exhaust’ may signal the inadvertent nature of such digital records and connote worthlessness, nothing could be further from the truth. In my own research, I have documented how digital exhaust can be used to help employees reduce work duplication and increase innovation (Leonardi, 2014), develop more accurate organizational metaknowledge – knowledge of ‘who knows what’ and ‘who knows who’ (Leonardi, 2015), and apportion work tasks more effectively (Leonardi, 2018). Organizational leaders who collect and analyse digital exhaust created by employees can develop efficient systems for knowledge transfer (Leonardi and Meyer, 2015) more effectively implement strategy (Neeley and Leonardi, 2018), and identify individuals whose networks are optimized for certain roles (Leonardi and Contractor, 2018). To more thoroughly explore the kinds of digital exhaust produced by remote work, researchers might ask questions such as: How do workers/managers interpret signals from one’s digital exhaust? How does access to colleagues’ digital exhaust shape an organization’s knowledge economy or power structure? What are the ethics of granting access to other people’s digital exhaust and what implications does it have for organizational justice and equity? By themselves, individual particles of digital exhaust contain very little meaning. For example, if an employee starts work late one day (as recorded by VPN login times), spends an unusually short amount of time working with information in a portal (as recorded by server-side time-stamps), and is unusually quiet in a meeting (as recorded by total seconds of talk-time in a Zoom session), none of these pieces of digital exhaust by themselves tells us much. But when those pieces are combined, examined over time to qualify a pattern of behaviour, and compared to other employees’ patterns, they can start to create inferences that an employee is, for example, disconnecting from the organization. Putting these pieces of digital exhaust together allows companies to construct digital footprints of employees, teams, and sub-units. Digital footprints are collections of data that represent an entity. They are the mathematical representation of everything a company knows about that entity and they are used to make predictions about its behaviour. Digital footprints are constantly updated as the entity produces more digital exhaust. In my research, I have documented how employees who recognize that their mediated activities allow companies to create digital footprints of them sometimes feel as though they are being surveilled by peers and leaders, causing them to act in ways that leave purposeful patterns of exhaust that effectively game the system (Leonardi and Treem, 2012). I’ve also shown how the creation of digital footprints can create a vicious cycle in which employees feel that everyone else’s actions are more visible than theirs, thus compelling them to work more so as to enable the company to produce a digital footprint of them suggesting they are exceptionally hard workers: These employees experience high levels of burnout (Cristea and Leonardi, 2019). Because the volume of digital exhaust produced in the era of COVID-19 is prodigious, organizations increasingly use algorithms that code digital exhaust into particular categories of action, sort those categories, and perform complex computations that link them together. The result is that algorithms are increasingly central in turning employees’ digital exhaust into digital footprints that serve as data representations of them. To explore this process, scholars might ask: Under what conditions do managers and leaders become confident that digital footprints are accurate representation of employee behaviour? What changes arise when employees become aware that management is observing their work by attending to their digital footprints? In what ways can digital footprints aid in mentoring and coaching and in what ways will they serve as warrants for disciplinary action or censure? It is only in the past several years that the computational power and development of mathematics undergirding AI have progressed far enough to make meaningful predictions based on people’s digital footprints. Although many companies were ready to analyse data at scale, they didn’t have enough of it to analyse because most employees’ actions were not recorded and stored. COVID-19 solved that problem. Today, companies are beginning to use algorithms to sift through the digital footprints assembled as remote workers create digital exhaust. The most advanced companies are using AI to combine these patterns with new datasets (like employee turnover or performance data) to test assumptions about certain relationships, learn autonomously from these tests, and, make predictions about future employee behaviour. These predictions can set the stage for managerial and organizational policy decisions. As organizations increasingly make use of algorithms to sort through the glut of digital exhaust they collect and store, employees are sometimes unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged by the way those data are turned into predictions by AI (Leonardi and Treem, in press). It is clear that the vast amounts of digital exhaust produced through remote work arrangements can improve organizational behaviour in many ways, but they also threaten to undermine some of the very systems, processes and institutions that make workplaces fair and equitable. Most of the digital tools organizations implement to help with remote work are cloud-based applications hosted by vendors whose contract rights give them access to some or all of the digital exhaust produced through them. Those vendors are able to use algorithmic modelling to create macro-level digital footprints of the behaviour of people and organizations and use AI to make predictions. They sell those predictions to other companies that market to us and bid to consult with our organizations, and they use those digital footprints to improve their own technologies in ways that allow them to collect even more digital exhaust. Zuboff (2019) has written eloquently about how vendors monetize digital exhaust and use it to construct digital footprints that predict and shape our behaviour. To explore how AI is used to turn digital footprints into predictions, researchers might begin to ask questions like: How will leaders incorporate AI-based predictions into their decision-making processes? Should organizations be required to let employees see predictions of their own behaviour and what are the consequences of this choice? Under what conditions do predictions of employee behaviour instigate a set of compensatory activities that turn them into self-fulfilling prophecies? Some observers argue that we are entering an era in which remote work will be the ‘new normal’. If that prediction comes true, it means that people, teams, and organizations will be quantified, modelled, and shaped in heretofore unknown ways. Others argue that remote work will not become mainstream soon and that most workers will return to offices when the pandemic subsides, will resume activities in which they work outside of digital technologies, and will produce much less digital exhaust. If that vision of the future comes true, it is unlikely to portend any less of a dramatic shift in the way organizations operate than if people remain working remotely. That is because the scale and duration of remote work that COVID-19 has enabled has already produced so much digital exhaust that companies will build models from this unique window of time for decades to come. Regardless of whether remote work remains common or whether it becomes another brief spike in the long history of starts and stops since the 1970s, it is very likely that the digital footprints produced during COVID-19 will serve the basis for many organizational practices, policies, and ideologies in the future. It is these second-order effects of remote work that need to be understood, discussed, and debated today so that organizational scholars can provide the insights that will allow us to thoughtfully build and manage the organizations of tomorrow.

8What has changed? The Impact of Covid Pandemic on the Technology and Innovation Management Research AgendaOpenAlex

Gerard George, Karim R. Lakhani, Phanish Puranam

Whereas the pandemic has tested the agility and resilience of organizations, it forces a deeper look at the assumptions underlying theoretical frameworks that guide managerial decisions and organizational practices. In this commentary, we explore the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on technology and innovation management research. We identify key assumptions, and then, discuss how new areas of investigation emerge based on the changed reality. The forced move to ‘working from home’ (WFH) that the pandemic created is perhaps the most significant organization design shock of our lifetimes. While remote work was a feature of multinational firms and open source communities among others, the pandemic effectively forced ‘all remote all the time’, resulting in a scramble to adapt to remote collaboration and its technological infrastructure. Whereas the data to assess its effectiveness has yet to be gathered, we know that many assumptions about what was feasible in a distributed setting already stand falsified. As data accumulate on this dramatic regime change, research into the particular combinations of tasks, people and infrastructure that enable organizations to work in distributed forms is bound to gather steam. Does remote collaboration require modularization of work? The common intuition is that it does, since electronic interaction has low media richness. Therefore, if workflows cannot be modularized, face-to-face (F2F) coordination becomes necessary per this logic. However, a distinct approach based on asynchronous tacit coordination may be a viable alternative (Srikanth and Puranam, 2014). We expect that the asynchronous coordination practices that are the backbone of software development, whether in open source (Linux) or for-profit contexts (e.g., GitLab) will become of broader interest. These allow complex interdependent work to be executed in a distributed context, with coordination relying not on video calls (‘seeing the face’) but rather on mutual observability of work (‘seeing the work’) through code repositories and systemic procedures for ensuring compatibility (e.g., the ‘Git’ process or continuous integration technologies). This third path to coordinating work that relies neither on reducing interdependencies through modularization nor on real time interaction and communication may have broader applicability than previously considered. Further, does WFH increase the importance of managerial monitoring and control technologies? If monitoring is expensive, basic organization design principles suggest a switch from behavioural to outcome-based control (Puranam, 2018). The digitalization of work may make the latter more feasible than ever, allowing workers to be evaluated on results, not behaviours. At the same time, digital technologies can enable intrusive surveillance, creating a managerial Panopticon. Collaboration and communication drive innovation behaviour. Will creativity suffer as a consequence of WFH? The antecedents of creativity in virtual teams remain largely unexplored (Gilson et al., 2015). There is little doubt that F2F interaction plays a positive role in group-level creativity, but what is unclear is how much of that can be replicated or bettered in online contexts. Could conformity pressures that induce groupthink be less prevalent in virtual groups? Can rapid iteration and prototyping with boundary objects be feasible online? Will collaboration patterns change in terms of co-producers of knowledge? Virtual work might nudge individual exploration patterns such that the locus of search shifts from co-located offices to geographically distant colleagues. At the same time, there are concerns on virtualization of work. How do we onboard new members of an organization? In particular, how do we build new scientific and technology teams from members who may have never met in the physical world? If innovation is predicated on mutual knowledge among collaborators occupying various structural positions within a network of scientists experimenting with different technology components (Schillebeeckx et al., 2019), does the network structure change with virtualization or does experimenting with technology components become more (or less) radical if social interactions are reshaped? Daily working routines in which scientists have been embedded in for decades are disrupted, would this manifest in subtle shifts in the types of problems that individuals choose to solve, and how do these, in turn, affect the broader progress of science? Team dynamics and the implications of virtualization on collaboration and creativity will become increasingly important for innovation research. The viral contagion has also created a social contagion in terms of technology adoption behaviours. From a firm-level perspective, Covid is credited with a fundamental transformation of the digital infrastructure of business. The pandemic has hastened the adoption of digital technologies and cloud applications in terms of delivery of core businesses. For example, contactless technologies, digital money and cashless payment systems have all become pervasive in their rollout. Across all sectors, digital transformation is in progress at a pace never seen before. Do all businesses become digitally enabled? What does this adoption mean for new business models or for social inclusion, and are we exacerbating the digital divide with the disenfranchised members of the community? Does time compression mean that we overlook important issues? For instance, the ‘Trace and Test’ apps to track infections could reflect a shifting emphasis of collective good over personal privacy, and a greater willingness to cede power and control to government. These large-scale adoption behaviours could mark fundamental changes in attitudes of society and reflect a renegotiated equilibrium on the role of technology and government in our daily lives. The vast majority of innovation infrastructure cannot yet be virtualized. While a lot of emphasis is on service sector innovation, there appears to be a declining interest in the large physical infrastructure required to make scientific breakthroughs. We know little about the implications of forced virtualization for the design of large, integrated labs. What will happen to the conduct of ‘big science’? Will this pandemic make us redesign how we conduct large experiments to push the frontiers of science? For example, drug development (other than Covid) has taken a backseat, clinical trials of new life saving medicines have been indefinitely postponed. What are the upstream implications for scientific talent? Do we need more scientists or fewer? Would certain scientific or innovation domains become more important due to flows of investment capital and managerial attention? The physical infrastructure required for innovation has been the dominant model for over a century. The pandemic raises questions on the conduct of science and discovery and how innovation infrastructure, including labs, buildings, and social ecosystems, might change. The impact of Covid has not been uniform across industries. In some, including the educational sector, we are seeing a flurry of innovations with new business models that finally take online education, and its variants seriously. In others, such as hospitality and tourism, the outlook appears bleak. Has Covid accelerated the demise of certain industries or hastened the emergence of nascent industries? What factors allow us to predict the changing consumption patterns and emergence of new business models, as well as the demise of older ones, that underlie these processes? Will the data evolution that was gathering steam come to an abrupt halt as machine learning enthusiasts discover that their training data from the pre-Covid era is simply non-representative of today (Iansiti and Lakhani, 2020)? Or will the enhanced digitalization of work make such technologies more useful than ever going forward, since so much more of the economy is now bring captured digitally? If agglomeration economies have driven the spatial evolution of industries, will Covid act as a ‘great decongestant’ given the realization that the costs of agglomeration in the form of viral diffusion may be significant? Perhaps the pandemic will hasten the process of de-globalization and the withdrawal from trade and collaborative research partnerships across countries and regions. These shifts can have profound implications on the evolution of industrial organization. Covid as a disease is characterised by an exponential growth process. We have now learned about disastrous consequences when an exponential system collides with a system with fixed or concave capacity, for example, health care systems with fixed capacities trying to manage Covid caseload with exponential growth rates. Furthermore, the heterogenous geopolitical response to the crisis points to countries having varying institutional capabilities to understand, monitor and effectively manage an exponential system. This situation is emblematic of prior industry collisions (Iansiti and Lakhani, 2020) between companies with network-enabled exponential growth and incumbents with fixed capacities in industries such as software, music, telecommunications, hospitality, and transportation sectors. Here too, new entrants with digital operating models established exponential growth trajectories that greatly weakened or destroyed incumbents with fixed capacities (e.g., Amazon versus the US retail sector, Google versus traditional advertising, or AirBnB versus the hotel sector). Given the prospect of future pandemics and digital-enabled entrants in many industries, a key research area is the organizational and industrial strategy to deal with exponential systems. The pandemic has heightened our self-awareness of inequity through its disproportional impact on individuals and disenfranchised communities. While research exists on how digital access can improve life chances, the pandemic has thrown social inclusion in sharp relief. Future research now has a discontinuity to study the distributional consequences of innovation and the adoption of new technologies: who benefits from innovation? Who is excluded from wealth creation, and what are its implications for wellbeing? The pandemic may have provided a fillip to businesses pursuing sustainable outcomes. Breathable air, cleaner oceans, and stories of wildlife reclaiming areas fallen to human habitation during Covid lockdown have sensitized our collective conscience to the need for innovations in technologies and business models to combat climate change and promote sustainable development (George et al., 2020). As we examine the effects of the pandemic, we need to be aware that its effects on populations are not the same. There is little doubt that the pandemic has altered the way we live and work. In this essay, we have explored some fundamental changes in our assumptions underlying theories of innovation. We encourage scholars to help the world better understand the longer term implications of this crisis, and how we can contribute evidence to ongoing debates on the future of management and business.

19“In the office nine to five, five days a week… those days are gone”: qualitative exploration of diplomatic personnel’s experiences of remote working during the COVID-19 pandemicOpenAlex

Samantha K. Brooks, Charlotte E. Hall, Dipti Patel, et al.

BACKGROUND: Many employees had to work remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Literature suggests there are both challenges and benefits to remote working and that remote working can have detrimental effects on mental health. This study aimed to explore diplomatic personnel's perceptions and experiences of working from home during the pandemic. METHODS: Twenty-five employees of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office took part in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was carried out to extract recurring themes from the data. RESULTS: Seven main themes emerged from the data: impact of the pandemic on work; relationships with colleagues; benefits of working from home; challenges of working from home; family; moving posts during the pandemic; and perceptions and predictions of post-pandemic work. Participants provided mixed views on how remote working had affected productivity and relationships with colleagues. Benefits of working from home included greater freedom and flexibility; new opportunities; and inclusivity of remote meetings. Challenges included being in different time zones to the countries they were working for; unsuitable home ergonomics; technological issues; and difficulties finding appropriate work-life balance. Those with young children reported difficulties juggling work and childcare. Adjusting to new posts at a time when staff were working remotely appeared particularly challenging. However, most did not want or expect to return to entirely office-based work. They predicted a hybrid model of working in the future, involving both office work and remote work; they stressed the importance of flexibility and suggested there would not be a one-size-fits-all approach to returning to face-to-face work. CONCLUSIONS: Remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the ways in which employees work, showing them that they do not have to be in the office to successfully achieve their work goals and leaving many wanting flexibility to make their own decisions about working from home (or not). There are both benefits and challenges to remote working; managers can take steps to reduce some of the challenges by being available to support their employees, organising regular remote meetings and allowing employees autonomy in terms of when and where they work.

32Distance: digital immersive technologies and craft engagementOpenAlex

Inge Panneels, Ingi Helgason, Michael Smyth, et al.

The DISTANCE project (digital immersive technologies and craft engagement) is a novel practice-led experiment in the use of immersive technology to enable dispersed craft practitioners to apply their haptic skills and material knowledge in a digital immersive space, learning from peers through remote collaboration. Craft practice is rooted in tactile interpretation of materials expressed through tacit, haptic processes In this paper we ask; what role can haptic crafts skills play in a virtual studio environment? The paper reflects on the interaction between different craft disciplines and thus how different kinds of tacit knowledge impact on the act of creation in an immersive space How does a VR studio relate to a material studio practice (Corazzo, 2019)? Conversely, what are the drawbacks of such places in terms of collaboration when craft practices are rooted in material knowledge and haptic skill? Through a series of semi-structured workshops, practitioners shared their experiences of working alone and collaboratively within immersive space and discussed the unique challenges and opportunities of integrating and sharing haptic-driven creative processes and experiences with digital space. Thematic analysis of workshop discussions, interpreted by both craft and HCI experts, are presented alongside analysis of the work produced. This paper describes the role that haptic skills can play within immersive environments for craft practitioners and discusses current challenges to be addressed and opportunities for future work in hybrid digital-physical spaces. The paper also reflects on the role a virtual studio space can play as a shared learning environment. What are the barriers to adopting a virtual studio practice using VR? How does a VR studio connect to a physical making place? It is becoming increasingly important for creative practitioners to gain digital skills and competencies, both for creative production and for collaboration While the Covid pandemic meant that many more activities were conducted online or through digital means, this technological transformation has been underway for many years already In the United Kingdom, the term "CreaTech" has been coined to describe the emergence and importance of this intersection where digital and data skills meet creativity (Bahkshi et al, 2019). Finally, the paper reflects on what role a virtual studio can play in supporting a sustainable craft practice: how does a virtual creative place that offers limitless options in terms of scale, material exploration, unhindered by physical limitations impact physical making practices?

53Remote work transition amidst COVID-19: Impacts on presenteeism, absenteeism, and worker well-being-A scoping review.PubMed

Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia, Alexia M Haritos, Bao-Zhu Stephanie Long, et al.

PLoS One. 2024 Jul 18;19(7):e0307087. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307087. eCollection 2024.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the transition to remote work, leading to increased attention on presenteeism and absenteeism among remote workers. Understanding the implications of these phenomena on worker health and productivity is crucial for optimizing remote work arrangements and developing policies to improve employee well-being. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aims to examine the occurrence of presenteeism and absenteeism among remote workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and the interrelated physical and mental health issues during these periods. METHODS: PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Eric, Business Source Premier, SCOPUS, and sociological abstracts were searched resulting in 1792 articles. Articles were included if the population of interest was 18+ (i.e., working age), engaged in full or part-time work, and the employees shifted from in-person to remote work due to the COVID-19 pandemic. All study designs, geographical areas, and papers written post-onset of the COVID-19 pandemic were included; however, systematic reviews were excluded. Data was charted into Microsoft Excel by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The literature search identified 10 studies (i.e., seven cross-sectional studies, two qualitative studies, and one observational study). Five major overarching themes were identified specifically (1) telework and mental health (2) telework and physical health (3) worker benefits (4) gender dynamics and (5) difficulty navigating the teleworking environment. While remote work offers flexibility in terms of saved commute time and flexible work schedules, it also exacerbates challenges related to presenteeism, absenteeism, and work-life balance. These challenges include experiencing psychological distress, depression, anxiety, stress, sleep deprivation, musculoskeletal pain, difficulties concentrating at work for both women and working parents, struggles disconnecting after hours, and the inability to delineate between the work and home environment. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic has both positive and negative implications for worker well-being and productivity. However, future research needs to incorporate the potential effects of telework frequency (full time vs. part time) on employee productivity and its role on presenteeism and absenteeism, to gain a more comprehensive understanding on remote work difficulties. Addressing these challenges requires proactive interventions and support mechanisms to promote worker health and productivity in remote settings.

57Implications of the COVID‐19 Pandemic for Gender Equity Issues at WorkOpenAlex

Frances J. Milliken, Madeline King Kneeland, Elinor Flynn

As we write this commentary in the late summer of 2020 in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, we are observing a world of work (and of unemployment) vastly different than it was six short months ago. In this commentary, we focus on the effects the coronavirus pandemic has had, and may continue to have, on gender equity issues in organizations and society. In particular, we consider how the reduced frequency of face-to-face communication in this time period, coupled with the potential for increased work-family conflict and weakened network ties, may be differentially impacting the careers of men and women. The furloughs and job losses that occurred in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected female workers, who were overrepresented in some of the hardest hit sectors of the economy, including retail, travel, childcare, and education. This has been a global pattern, with women making up 39 per cent of global employment but 54 per cent of pandemic-related job losses (Madgavkar et al., 2020). Higher female unemployment during the pandemic may have a long-term impact on gender equity as prior research has shown that gaps in employment can reduce life-time earnings and hinder career progression. Another major change due to COVID-19 has been the switch that many employees have made from working in an office to working from home. According to a recent survey (Brynjolfsson et al., 2020), over half of respondents in the United States were working from home in April of 2020, up from about 15 per cent in February. In addition, many children attended school on-line during the pandemic, which meant that millions of working parents had to work, parent, and sometimes homeschool their children at the same time and in the same place. Since women generally do more of the child care, on-line schooling may adversely affect women’s careers in particular, both in the short-term and beyond. While this commentary largely focuses on the gendered consequences of the switch to remote work, we also want to acknowledge the unique challenges faced by women who are ‘essential workers’. Women make up almost 90 per cent of nurses and nursing assistants in the United States and over two-thirds of grocery store cashiers (Roberston and Gebeloff, 2020). These essential workers have had to face the daily dilemma of how to keep their families healthy and safe while continuing to work in potentially risky circumstances. A disproportionate percentage of these female frontline workers in the USA are women of colour, highlighting the necessity for future research to examine the intersectionality of race and gender on work-related outcomes. It is also important to recognize the highly precarious situation of working women who are single mothers, a group which represents 17 per cent of all US households. As management scholars we need to pay more attention to understanding the work-life challenges of essential workers, working women of colour, and single mothers, populations who have been understudied. The coronavirus pandemic has brought unprecedented changes to work and family life. We focus here on the particular challenges associated with working from home. While past research found that working remotely was associated with reduced levels of work-family conflict (Gajendran and Harrison, 2007), we question whether this finding will hold in the era of COVID-19. The switch to remote work during the pandemic has dissolved boundaries between work and family, which can create role confusion, interruptions, and greater work-family conflict. The involuntary nature of remote work, the greater demands at home (e.g., childcare and housework with less support), and the longer work days that often characterize work during this crisis may also exacerbate work-family conflict. Although these factors affect both genders, because women tend to shoulder the majority of housework and childcare, and experience more work-family conflict when family interference with work is high, we hypothesize that they are experiencing more conflict overall. Key research questions include: Will couples renegotiate their child-care and household routines in more egalitarian ways post-pandemic, as early data suggests (Carlson et al., unpublished)? How will the current experience of work-family conflict affect employees’ attitudes and post-pandemic work-related decisions? Finally, to what extent will gender differences in the willingness to use work-from-home options persist? Recent research finds that women are reducing their work hours or leaving the workforce altogether due to childcare constraints at three to four times the rate men are, resulting in a projected 20–50 per cent increase in the gender gap in work hours (Collins et al., 2020). These findings suggest that women may face long-term consequences in the form of reduced lifetime earnings and promotions. What role will individual, organizational and country-level factors (e.g., gender egalitarianism, collectivism, and the availability of social policies like paid leave) play in determining the extent of gender differences in work hours and turnover? The complexity of working from home coupled with the experience of higher levels of work-family conflict may result in decreased well-being, job, and life satisfaction in the short-term, as well as lower performance ratings, career satisfaction, salary, and hierarchical position in the long-term (Hoobler et al., 2010). As an illustration, empirical (Matthews, 2020) and anecdotal data suggest that female academics have been less productive than their male counterparts during the pandemic, relative to the same period last year. It is likely that women in other career fields are also struggling to maintain productivity during COVID-19, and thus we expect these findings may be generalizable. What policy changes will be effective in preventing this lost productivity from having a long-term impact on pay and promotion rates for women? The networks of individuals in key decision-making roles (e.g., top management teams) within organizations are often male-dominated. Women are often not well integrated into these powerful networks (e.g., Brass, 1985), a factor that disadvantages them in terms of accessing information and obtaining promotions. Women frequently need to do double duty on the networking front (Ibarra, 1992), obtaining their professional resources (e.g., budget allocations, information) from connections who control those resources (usually men), and their personal resources (e.g., emotional support) from other women. This often leaves women relying on what are potentially ‘weak ties’ for access to critical information and resources. There is reason to believe that network ties, especially ‘weak ties’, are harder to maintain in a virtual world. ‘Inevitably, going all virtual means that many interactions diminish, relationships recede, work networks shrink, and the organization becomes less interconnected’ (Levin and Kurtzberg, 2020). A contributing factor may be the lack of opportunity for face-to-face informal conversations with colleagues in elevators or during coffee breaks. While individuals ‘do still keep in touch with the people they feel closest to and with co-workers they’re required to work with on particular tasks’, the level of interaction with ‘weak ties’ is likely drastically reduced (Levin and Kurtzberg, 2020). Critical research questions include: How does having a majority of employees working remotely affect women’s access to important information passed through informal networks and weak ties? And, what individual and organizational factors contribute to variance in the effectiveness of women’s networks in a world characterized by remote work? Women’s ability to express and receive credit for their ideas may be another area impacted by remote work during the pandemic. Video tele-conferencing makes reading social cues more difficult and may make speaking up seem riskier, especially for low-power employees. Prior research suggests that women suffer a performance penalty for speaking up frequently during meetings (Brescoll, 2011) while men are perceived as more competent when they do so. How do virtual work communication tools (e.g., video conferencing) affect who speaks up in meetings and how their contributions are perceived? Women’s access to critical information may also be impacted by the tendency of managers to centralize authority in response to crises, a phenomenon that is part of the so-called ‘threat-rigidity effect’ (Staw et al., 1981). This, of course, means fewer people in the organization will be involved in decision-making, and that people below the top of the corporate chart, or who are not tightly tied to those at the top, are likely to be left out. Are women having fewer opportunities than men to participate in making critical decisions about the future of their organizations during the pandemic? If so, what are the consequences of this exclusion for the quality of decision-making in organizations, for women’s perceived influence, and for their feelings of belonging? Figure 1 diagrams some of the mechanisms through which the coronavirus pandemic may affect work and leadership-related outcomes for women. The picture is a deeply concerning one that suggests that women are likely to be more severely affected by the pandemic than men in domains such as well-being, job satisfaction, performance, and career progression. However, as in most crises, the disruption of the status quo also presents organizations with opportunities for positive change. As remote work becomes more widespread, could the ‘flexibility stigma’ attached to working remotely (Leslie et al., 2012) be reduced? If so, to what extent will this benefit working mothers? Moreover, with the increased salience of work-family issues, will men be more willing to engage in work-family policy-related conversations? Finally, as remote work exposes the fragility of ‘weak ties’ in networks, will managers take the opportunity to think about how to create more inclusive networks and better integrate those who have been previously only marginally included? We hope management scholars will pursue research agendas that speak to the issues outlined in this commentary. The importance of gender equity reverberates far beyond the walls of an organization; as a recent McKinsey Global Institute report states, ‘what is good for greater gender equality is also good for the economy and society as a whole’ (Madgaykar et al., 2020, p. 10).

58Gender Equity Considerations for Tenure and Promotion during COVID‐19OpenAlex

Merin Oleschuk

AS THE EFFECTS of COVID-19 emerge over time, it has become clear that the pandemic holds important implications for gendered inequalities in a variety of realms, including academia. Long-standing inequalities in both paid and domestic work appear to be exaggerated during the present pandemic circumstances in ways that disproportionately hinder the productivity of academic women. Stories in both news and social media abound of female scholars struggling to balance work and care demands while the productivity of their male colleagues rises (see, e.g., the twitter hashtag #coronapublicationgap). This commentary reviews emerging research in care and academic work during the COVID-19 pandemic to investigate evidence of this discrepancy in the research outputs of female and male faculty since the pandemic began severely affecting social life—in approximately March 2020. While it is still too early to get a complete picture of the pandemic's impact, evidence from research initiation reports, preprint servers, and journal submissions points to clear gendered differences—differences that are expected to become more pronounced over time and which will impact academic women's career advancement in years to come. Importantly, the inequalities shaping women's and men's academic careers are not new; they existed well before COVID-19 hit North American universities in March. Gender differences in academic success are long-standing and have been documented across disciplines in academia, with BIPOC female faculty being especially penalized.1 They include disparities between men's and women's representation in faculty positions, publication rates, citations, recognition, and salary that regularly favor men over women (Council of Canadian Academics 2012; Huang et al. 2020; King 2008; Ortega-Liston & Soto 2014; Timmons 2016). Existing research stresses that these differences are not reflective of differences in the merit of male and female scholars, but rather, systemic barriers impeding the productivity of female academics throughout their careers such as the structure of career absences (Cameron, White, and Gray 2016), the peer review process (Witteman et al. 2019), resource and grant allocation (Duch et al. 2012), service demands (Hanasono et al. 2019), implicit biases and stereotypes (King 2008), work climates (Milkman, Akinola, and Chugh 2012), and family and household responsibilities (Mason et al. 2005).2 These systemic barriers, particularly those around family and household responsibilities, are being exacerbated during the pandemic period. Rising care demands created by COVID-19—specifically those brought on by remote working, a lack of childcare, and the virus’ particular risk to aging populations—are disproportionately incurred by women and impede their ability to work. The starkness of gender differences in productivity and its visibility during this time provokes a rethinking of how faculty will be evaluated for tenure and promotion during the pandemic and beyond it. With or without a vaccine, the effects of this pandemic will reverberate for years to come, both in the physical disruptions brought on by intermittent lockdowns and school and daycare closures, as well as the psychological toll that regular isolation puts on individuals, children, and families. This report underscores that the impact of those burdens are not incurred equally. The COVID-19 pandemic serves as an opportunity and a provocation to rethink our established ways of evaluating academic success to acknowledge and ameliorate systemic differences in its enactment. Doing so can help pave a more equitable path forward. The remainder of this document reviews emerging research on the gendered corona publication gap and presents suggestions for Tenure and Promotion Committees at Canadian Universities to consider to mitigate this gap when evaluating faculty research during the COVID-19 period. The period of the lockdown has been relatively short compared to normative research timelines, making it difficult to determine the precise impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women's productivity; however, data from journal submissions, preprint servers, and databases logging the initiation of new research projects offers some indication of present productivity and indeed point to gendered disparities over the past few months. Early evidence of gendered disparities in productivity has come from journal submissions. Reports from journal editors in the fields of International Studies, Political Science, Economics, Medicine, and Philosophy indicate that while overall journal submissions have risen since the pandemic hit, the proportion of those submissions authored by women, and especially sole-authored by women, in most cases has dropped. In particular, the editors of the four International Studies Association journals (International Studies Quarterly, International Political Sociology, International Studies Review, and International Studies Perspectives), as well as those of British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Comparative Political Studies, and Review of Economic Studies have all reported smaller proportions of submissions by women within the first two months of the pandemic compared to prior to it (Fazackerley 2020; Flaherty 2020; Fuchs-Schündeln 2020; Wiegand et al. 2020). Additionally, while a report published by the American Journal of Political Science saw a slightly larger proportion of pandemic submissions by women, the proportion of sole-authored papers by women during this period fell, indicating that while female academics are still submitting manuscripts for publication during the crisis, they are submitting less of their own work than men (Dolan and Lawless 2020). The exaggerated disparities found in sole-authored publications are similarly found in other journals (Fazackerley 2020; Flaherty 2020; Wiegand et. al. 2020). Lastly, in the field of medicine, Andersen et al. (2020) analyze the proportion of women publishing papers dedicated to the COVID-19 pandemic in medical journals and find that the proportion of papers with a woman first author during this period was 19 percent lower than for papers published in the same journals in 2019. These findings offer some indication that gender inequalities are shaping COVID's impact on academic productivity; however, apart from publications dedicated to COVID itself, journal submissions are not the best indicator of productivity during COVID because they generally rely on a vast amount of work completed before the pandemic hit. Other researchers have turned to preprint servers as indicators of present research productivity. Many academics today post their in-progress or submitted research to these servers, so analyzing how the number of submissions to these servers varies by gender offers valuable insights into gendered differences in academic productivity at the moment. In addition, preregistration reports—or reports filed by researchers to record the initiation of new research—can indicate of the extent to which new projects are being initiated by men and women, respectively. A number of studies have analyzed preprint and preregistration databases from a variety of disciplines, and together, offer evidence that the pandemic is disproportionately hindering the productivity of female scholars (Amano-Patiño et al. 2020; Cui, Ding, and Zhu 2020; Frederickson 2020; Myers et al. 2020; Shurchkov 2020; Vincent-Lamarre, Sugimoto, and Larivière 2020a; 2020b; see Peters 2020; Viglione 2020 for a summary of many of these studies). For example, Frederickson (2020) analyzes two popular preprint servers in the STEM fields—ArXiv and bioRxiv—for differences in men's and women's submissions between March and April 15, 2020. Frederickson's analysis shows that the proportion of men submitting to both these servers, as sole-authors and as co-authors, is growing faster than that of women when compared both to the months leading up to COVID and during the same period in 2019. These trends also seem to hold true beyond the STEM fields. Analyzing the posting of preprints/working papers by female economists to seven databases, Shurchkov (2020) similarly found a 12 percent reduction in the posting of preprints and registered reports in March 2020 and a 20 percent reduction in April. Shurchkov hypothesizes that this drop will continue to grow in the coming months as many of these projects were likely in the works prior to the pandemic. Amano-Patiño et al. (2020) reveal similar findings among economics pre-prints. In addition, they also find that female economists are much less likely than men to be working on new projects related to the COVID pandemic—the proportion of female authors working on this new research is only 14.6 percent, whereas comparably, female authors usually make up about 20 percent of research in these databases. Vincent-Lamarre, Sugimoto and Larivière (2020a, 2020b) expand the disciplinary scope of this analysis further by analyzing 11 preprint repositories and 3 platforms used for registering reports that indicate the initiation of new projects. Their analysis points to disparities in a variety of realms. First, when analyzing all 11 preprint repositories, they observed lower submission rates overall from women for March and April 2020 compared to both the preceding two months in 2020 and the same two months of 2019. Variations nonetheless existed by preprint repository, with the biggest drops in women's submissions observed in EarthArXiv, medRxiv, NBER, and notably for the field of sociology, SocArXiv. In addition, they saw female authorship increasing prior to the pandemic—in January and February of 2020—in arXiv and bioRxiv, but then observed a drop in these repositories to match rates of the previous years during March and April. Third, the authors found that preregistration similarly dropped for women in two of the three repositories examined. Importantly, Vincent-Lamarre et al.'s (2020a, 2020b) research also points to likely differences in the impact of the pandemic for female academics at different career stages. Their research reveals that there was a larger reduction in paper submissions where women were the first authors compared to those where they were the last authors. Given that the norm in many of the disciplines represented in these repositories is to assign the first authorship to a more junior scholar and the last authorship to a senior scholar, this trend suggests that the pandemic may disproportionately affect women in the early stages of their careers. This corresponds with growing calls to acknowledge the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on early career researchers as a whole, for whom disruptions in their careers could have compounding effects in years to come (Husby and Modinos 2020). Importantly, Vincent-Lamarre et al. (2020a, 2020b) note that the largest drop in early career female submissions was in COVID-related research. Given that this research is likely the best indication of work that is being conducted since (and in response to) the pandemic, this—along with similar findings by Amano-Patiño et al. (2020) and Andersen et al. (2020)—quite clearly demonstrates the differential impact of gender on academic productivity during COVID-19. When interpreting these studies, it is important to recognize the heterogeneity of gendered experiences. Many female academics do not have children or other dependents, and some may have access to childcare at this time. In addition, some male academics are primary or co-equal caregivers in their families. Other women are single mothers. These models also generally assume that academics are living in heterosexual, two-parent family forms, when we know that family compositions vary significantly beyond it. In other words, not all female academics are equally constrained in the COVID-19 pandemic. However, what this does mean is that the above findings very likely underestimate COVID-19's impact on academic mothers since they represent women as a whole. Indeed, a survey of 4,500 Principal Investigators at American and European research institutions found that gender and having young children were the biggest predictors of research disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic (Myers et al., 2020; see also Roberts, Kothe, and Wieden 2020). In addition, it is important to acknowledge that the above studies rely on approximations of gender based on authors’ names using name-gender algorithms. These algorithms have limitations in their potential to misgender or leave out authors—especially authors of color—in their analyses. While these algorithms do not accurately capture authors’ gender in all instances, they have been shown to draw from data sets that are big enough to overcome these limitations and still offer insight into gender inequity. Research in the areas of gender, work, and care can help explain these disparities as the inequalities that inform them during the present circumstances are exaggerated versions of existing inequalities. As discussed, they largely stem from the disproportionate time women spend doing unpaid care and emotional work, both at home and within their departments. This section presents a brief overview of these disparities while introducing recent research exploring their manifestation within the pandemic. Research expectations in higher education have been shown to favor those who can defer child and elder care, largely men who have partners performing full-time domestic labor and childcare (Mason et al., 2005). Those who are not able to defer care and domestic tasks therefore face added challenges to fulfilling those expectations. Long-standing evidence demonstrates that women perform significantly more domestic labor and care work than men, including in academic households (Bianchi et al. 2012; Mason et al. 2005; Shollen et al. 2009). For example, a study of medical faculty found that women spent 12 more hours per week on family and household responsibilities than their male colleagues (Shollen et al. 2009). In addition, male faculty are up to four times more likely than female faculty to be partnered with a stay-at-home spouse who engages in domestic work full-time (Schiebinger, Davies Henderson, and Gilmartin 2008:13). Female faculty (especially female faculty of color) have also been shown to perform more unpaid, emotional labor in universities such as through their disproportionate departmental and institutional service demands and the emotional labor they perform in the service of their students (Babcock et al. 2017; El-Alayli, Hansen-Brown, and Ceynar 2018; Guarino and Borden 2017; Hanasono et al. 2019; Mitchell and Hesli 2013; O'Meara 2018; Sprague and Massoni 2005). These demands create added obstacles for female faculty while navigating tenure and promotion expectations. How do these inequalities play out during COVID-19? Anecdotal evidence suggests that work-family conflicts hindering female faculty's career advancement are exacerbated during COVID-19 because women's care responsibilities, for both their families and their students, becomes heightened under the emotional strain of the pandemic (Alon et al. 2020; Boncori 2020; Buckee 2020; Costa 2020; Goodwin and Michneck 2020; Jedd et al. 2020; Malisch et al. 2020; Minello 2020; Peters 2020; Pettit 2020; Staniscuaski et al. 2020). No research currently exists documenting the service or work-family demands of academics in particular; however, recent survey research into the division of labor among families more broadly during the pandemic offers insight into how gender shapes work-life balance at home among heterosexual parents with children. Early research by Carlson, Petts, and Pepin (2020) of parents in the United States indicates that COVID-19 is both exacerbating and reducing gender inequalities in the domestic division of labor among heterosexual couples with children. As with before the pandemic, mothers are holding primary responsibility for housework and childcare in most families during this time. For those mothers who are shouldering most of the domestic work, many report their time in that work has increased due to the addition of homeschooling responsibilities. However, the authors also argue that “the proportion of families where moms are primarily responsible for domestic labor have decreased substantially while the proportion reporting equal sharing of housework and childcare has increased” (9). This means that in many families, fathers are increasing their domestic workload in ways that likely reduce these burdens for their female partners. However, the authors also warn that these findings must be interpreted cautiously as “greater exposure to domestic work may also lead fathers to perceive that they are spending more time in these tasks then they actually are” (9). Indeed, the authors find that mothers and fathers disagreed substantially about the extent of fathers’ increased work (see also Cain Miller 2020). Schafer, Milkie, and Scheibling (2020) report similar findings within the Canadian context. They show that among two-parent opposite-sex families with children, the percentage of parents agreeing that housework and childcare was divided equally has risen modestly since the pandemic hit, but also that mothers’ and fathers’ reports varied significantly. Research into parents’ time spent in paid work during the pandemic adds important complexity to these findings. Looking at dual earner heterosexual parents, Collins et al. (2020) find that mothers with children under 12 have reduced their work hours four to five times more than fathers (by about 5 percent or two hours a week, while fathers work hours generally remained stable). Similarly, Andrew et al. (2020) reveal that among families with two heterosexual parents, mothers are more likely than fathers to have left paid work due to the pandemic, and among those with both parents still in paid work, mothers have seen a larger proportional reduction of hours spent doing that work than fathers. They also find that mothers are more likely than fathers to spend their work hours simultaneously trying to care for children (see also Topping 2020 for a review of this research). The authors argue that “the combined effect is that in lockdown, mothers in two-parent households are only doing, on average, a third of the uninterrupted paid-work hours of fathers” (para. 4). In addition, mothers in this study were much more likely to be interrupted during their paid working hours than fathers: almost half (47 percent) of the time mothers spent on paid work was combined with other household or care activities, compared to 30 percent of fathers’ paid-work time. Regarding household and care work, Andrew et al. (2020) find that during the pandemic, mothers recorded looking after children for an average of 10.3 hours per day—2.3 more hours per day than fathers. They were similarly performing 1.7 more hours of housework per day than fathers. However, this research also indicates that fathers have increased the time they spend on domestic labor and childcare. It shows that on average, fathers are now spending twice as many hours on childcare as they were during 2014 to 2015, showing that they are now taking on a greater share of household responsibilities than they were prior to the crisis. Together, these studies point to a few trends in paid and care work among heterosexual couples: fathers do seem to be increasing the amount of time they spend in care and domestic work; however, mothers still perform much more of that work than and it is more likely to impede on mothers’ paid-work time than In addition, mothers spend much more of their paid-work hours simultaneously for children or their This discrepancy is especially important for academics for whom uninterrupted time is to The extent of COVID-19's impact on gendered disparities in productivity among academics will time to However, the early research offers a of the that are long-standing but exaggerated now as work and domestic have and gendered disparities have become more The COVID-19 pandemic a where in the This research points to the of universities to consider how their can into gendered in labor that affect academic women, and particularly those for school and children, and other with faculty with a on their tenure to time to tenure the opportunity for faculty to out to be during the pandemic and consider in tenure and promotion that inform tenure and promotion that they lower the for promotion for that period. This could also include indicators and for tenure and other faculty (and especially junior with care demands more research and and greater to that This could for example, up to or for those with added care burdens during the pandemic, or faculty research to and the of those that in service for those with demands there is a COVID-19 This for example, review and peer and faculty for COVID-19 a response to faculty faculty help especially those with or care demands to those who do by taking on more service work or to in and within and universities for those with care that the impact of the pandemic on academic parents, and mothers in particular, in departmental and This and that we are doing as best we than as or a of expectations for faculty during this time to the added stresses that come from the how the pandemic will impact their expectations of their institutional around gender, work, and This not men for their childcare responsibilities while women for faculty and students about the gender gap and its and the of and academic work mothers to at work or parents to their children to It also work-life balance by being of how in the of the for example, may Importantly, faculty across universities have also that have and while making during the pandemic. The of has universities to to the that have their by academic and faculty in their

61Benefits and Limitations of Remote Work to LGBTQIA+ Software ProfessionalsOpenAlex

Ronnie de Souza Santos, Cleyton Magalhães, Paul Ralph

Background. The mass transition to remote work amid the COVID-19 pandemic profoundly affected software professionals, who abruptly shifted into ostensibly temporary home offices. The effects of this transition on these professionals are complex, depending on the particularities of the context and individuals. Recent studies advocate for remote structures to create opportunities for many equity-deserving groups; however, remote work can also be challenging for some individuals, such as women and individuals with disabilities. As the discussions on equity, diversity, and inclusion increase in software engineering, it is important to explore the realities and perspectives of different equity-deserving groups to develop strategies that can support them post-pandemic. Objective. This study aims to investigate the effects of remote work on LGBTQIA+ software professionals. Method. Grounded theory methodology was applied based on information collected from two main sources: a survey questionnaire with a sample of 57 LGBTQIA+ software professionals and nine follow-up interviews with individuals from this sample. This sample included professionals of different genders, ethnicities, sexual orientations, and levels of experience. Consistent with grounded theory methodology, the process of data collection and analysis was conducted iteratively using three stages of coding: line-by-line, focused, and theoretical. Member checking was used to validate the findings obtained from interpreting the experiences commented on by LGBTQIA+ software professionals. Findings. Our findings demonstrate that (1) remote work benefits LGBTQIA+ people by increasing security and visibility; (2) remote work harms LGBTQIA+ software professionals through isolation and invisibility; (3) the benefits outweigh the drawbacks; (4) the drawbacks can be mitigated by supportive measures developed by software companies. Conclusion. This paper investigated how remote work can affect LGBTQIA+ software professionals and presented a set of recommendations on how software companies can address the benefits and limitations associated with this work model. In summary, we concluded that remote work is crucial in increasing diversity and inclusion in the software industry.General Abstract. Remote work is here to stay. There is no denying it, as some software professionals would rather quit their jobs than return to the office full-time. Therefore, software companies want to understand how the remote working model can be successfully used without causing major issues. The problem is that the effects of remote work are complex because they depend on individual and group characteristics that require careful evaluation. In this scenario, one thing has been extremely positive: remote work is helping to increase diversity in software engineering by fostering new opportunities and better work conditions for individuals from equity-deserving groups, for instance, LGBTQIA+ software professionals. The software industry is overly homogeneous, most of the professionals who work in this area are heterosexual men (a reflection of the university courses on computer science and software engineering), but diversity can only be good for an area that strongly depends on creativity and innovation. What better way to innovate than putting several individuals from different backgrounds and with various experiences to work together? Remote work plays an important role in improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in the software industry. In this paper, we discuss how remote work is affecting software professionals from the LGBTQIA+ community and provide a list of recommendations to support software companies in dealing with this work model.

62A millennial manager skills model for the new remote work environmentOpenAlex

Kerri M. Camp, Marilyn Young, Stephen C. Bushardt

Purpose This paper aims to propose that millennials – those born between 1980 and 1995 – are uniquely impacted by the long-term impact of the pandemic, which has accelerated the work from home movement and exacerbated organizational issues associated with working remotely. Millennials, on the cusp of embarking on important leadership roles in this new remote work environment, pose challenges and opportunities for organizations will that will last long after the pandemic. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a viewpoint based on a narrative review and on the authors’ professional experiences within organizations. Based upon these findings, this paper has reimagined the Mumford skills model to explore millennial managers in this new remote work, post-pandemic context. The goal of this narrative review was to provide a full picture of the “Millennial manager” and the challenges they face in becoming effective managers, as well as highlight the important strengths they bring to the table. Findings Managers may have challenges regarding job satisfaction, productivity and organizational commitment. The positive factors are millennials prefer flexibility, teamwork and creating a positive work-life balance. The negative side has to do with isolation and the ability to embrace the organization culture in a remote environment. This model shows positive and limiting factors of millennials related to organization effectiveness. The major propositions and model were that millennium managers in this new environment increase interpersonal communication to maintain trust, effective mentoring, resolve strong organizational culture and ensure effective delegation and conflict resolution. Practical implications This study discovered challenges for managers, including developing loyalty and improving employee job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Active listening is necessary for team management to show that all team members are valued irrespective of the work environment. Active listening and empathy will increase social support at work, which improves personal well-being and productivity. Millennials will continue to use their technological skills, their desire for teamwork and their preference for participative management, resulting in becoming an invaluable asset in this era of organizational transformation. The challenge for organizations is to realize the millennial generation possesses many talents and must successfully engage them in the pursuit of organizational goals. Originality/value This paper adds to the body of knowledge regarding millennials in organizations with a specific focus on the new work environment created by the global pandemic. The authors hope that their adapted skills model – the millennial manager skills model – becomes an important resource for articulation this new environment that millennial managers are in and that this model can be further refined and expanded through empirical exploration.

71Work Flexibility, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance among Romanian Employees—Implications for Sustainable Human Resource ManagementOpenAlex

Adriana AnaMaria Davidescu, Simona Andreea Apostu, Andreea Paul, et al.

In light of future work challenges, actual human resource management (HRM) needs to be redesigned, including long-term development, regeneration, and renewal of human resources, passing from consuming to developing human resources by incorporating the concept of sustainability. Thus, sustainable HRM is seen as an extension of strategic human resources, presenting a new approach to human resource management. The labor market is constantly changing, atypical work acquiring a significant relevance, especially in these current times of coronavirus crisis restrictions. In Romania, promoting the law of teleworking transformed labor flexibility into a topic of interest, and became an increasingly vital requirement for employment and a motivating factor for Romanian employees. In such a context, this paper aims to investigate the link between employee development and worktime and workspace flexibility as relevant characteristics of sustainable HRM, job satisfaction and job performance among Romanian employees in order to identify how to redesign HRM in the face of “future work” challenges. Additionally, the paper aims to examine the impact of different types of flexibility—contractual, functional, working time, and workspace flexibility—in order to highlight the relevance of employee development and employee flexibility as important aspects of sustainable HRM in increasing the overall level of employee job satisfaction. In order to make this possible, an “employee flexibility composite indicator,” which takes into account different types of flexibility, has been developed using feedback from Romanian employees, which was gathered by a national representative survey using multiple correspondence analysis. Furthermore, the impact of both individual and employee flexibility on overall level of job satisfaction has been quantified using binary logistic regression models. Within the research, there is a particular focus on the impact of new types of workspaces (flex office, co-working, total home office, partial home office—FO, CW, HOT, HOP) on job performance, job satisfaction, organizational performance, professional growth and development, social and professional relationships, and personal professional performance as well as on the overall level of work motivation. The empirical results revealed that these new types of workspaces are highly appreciated by employees, generating a growing interest among them. Partial home working, the mix between working from home and working in a company’s office, has been considered an optimal solution in increasing organizational performance, social and professional relationships, learning and personal development, and the overall level of work motivation. The results of the multiple correspondence analysis highlighted a medium level of flexibility among those Romanian employees interviewed, with only one third of them exhibiting high levels of flexibility. The empirical analysis of logistic regression analysis pointed out the role of functional flexibility, working time, and workspace flexibility along with the flexibility composite indicator in increasing the level of job satisfaction in employees. Therefore, if the challenge is to redesign the actual human resource management in order to include the concept of sustainability, attention needs to be on a combination of employee development-flexible time and flexible places, leading to an increase in both employee job satisfaction and organizational performance as important outcomes of sustainable HRM.

77Work-life balance and its impact in modern organizations: An HR reviewOpenAlex

Binaebi Gloria Bello, Sunday Tubokirifuruar Tula, Ganiyu Bolawale Omotoye, et al.

Work-life balance has become a critical aspect in modern organizational management, drawing attention from human resources professionals who play a pivotal role in shaping workplace policies. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the concept and its impact on contemporary organizations, emphasizing the role of Human Resources (HR) in fostering a harmonious work-life equilibrium. The contemporary workplace landscape is characterized by rapid technological advancements, globalization, and changing societal expectations, influencing employees' perceptions of their professional and personal lives. Achieving work-life balance is essential for employee well-being, job satisfaction, and overall organizational success. The HR department serves as a linchpin in crafting policies and initiatives that promote work-life balance, recognizing its profound impact on talent retention, productivity, and organizational culture. This review explores various strategies employed by HR professionals to enhance work-life balance, including flexible work arrangements, telecommuting options, and wellness programs. It delves into the challenges organizations face in implementing these initiatives, such as resistance from traditional workplace structures and the need to adapt to diverse employee needs. Additionally, the paper sheds light on the positive outcomes associated with successful work-life balance initiatives, such as increased employee engagement, reduced burnout, and improved organizational reputation. Furthermore, the paper examines the evolving role of HR in navigating the dynamic landscape of work-life balance, considering the integration of technology, changing demographics, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on remote work trends. It emphasizes the need for HR professionals to adopt proactive approaches, leveraging data analytics and continuous feedback mechanisms to tailor policies that cater to the diverse needs of employees. In conclusion, this HR-focused review underscores the significance of work-life balance in modern organizations and highlights the strategic role of HR professionals in shaping policies that foster a healthy equilibrium between professional and personal spheres, ultimately contributing to enhanced employee well-being and organizational success.

81Dietary Rhythmicity and Mental Health Among Airline Personnel.PubMed

Erliang Zhang, Huilun Li, Hangyu Han, et al.

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jul 1;7(7):e2422266. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.22266.

IMPORTANCE: Misaligned dietary rhythmicity has been associated with metabolic diseases; however, its association with mental health remains largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between dietary rhythms and the mental health condition of shift workers, specifically airline crew members. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study analyzed data collected from the Civil Aviation Health Cohort of China, an ongoing large-scale health survey of pilots, flight attendants, and air security officers employed by major airline companies in China. Participants aged 18 to 60 years were invited through text messages to complete a web-based survey. The data collection period was December 2022 to March 2023. Statistical analysis was performed from July 24, 2023, to April 12, 2024. EXPOSURE: Data on timing of breakfast and dinner on workdays and rest days, daily time windows for food intake, and meal and eating jet lags were collected and calculated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Anxiety and depressive symptoms were measured using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to evaluate the associations of anxiety and depression with meal timing, eating window time, meal jet lag (ie, delayed meals), and eating jet lag (ie, delayed eating). All models were adjusted for individual socioeconomic, demographic, and lifestyle characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 22 617 participants (median [IQR] age, 29.1 [26.3-33.7] years; 13 712 males [60.6%]), 1755 (7.8%) had anxiety and 2768 (12.2%) had depression. After controlling for confounding factors, having dinner after 8 pm on morning-shift days was associated with increased odds of anxiety (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.78; 95% CI, 1.53-2.05) and depression (AOR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.78-2.27), compared with consuming dinner before 8 pm. Similar results were observed on night-shift days and rest days. An eating window of less than 12 hours was associated with reduced odds of anxiety (AOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93) and depression (AOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.89) on morning-shift days; the results remained significant on rest days. Delayed dinner on morning-shift days was associated with increased odds of anxiety (AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54) and depression (AOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.22-1.58). On night-shift days, delayed dinner was associated with higher odds of anxiety (AOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.39) and depression (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08-1.36). On morning-shift days, delayed eating rhythms were associated with higher odds of depression (AOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.61), whereas advanced eating rhythms were associated with lower odds of anxiety (AOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.87). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cross-sectional study found that meal timing, long eating window, and meal jet lags were associated with increased odds of depression and anxiety. These findings underscore the need for interventions and supportive policies that help mitigate the adverse implications of shift work and irregular working hours for the mental health of shift workers.

远程与混合办公模式对组织绩效及员工幸福感的影响研究综述

深度研究匿名用户发表于 2026年05月06日 20:1721阅读

发起深度研究

内容由 AI 生成，仅供参考，请仔细甄别

参考文献

7COVID‐19 and the New Technologies of Organizing: Digital Exhaust, Digital Footprints, and Artificial Intelligence in the Wake of Remote WorkOpenAlex

Paul M. Leonardi

8What has changed? The Impact of Covid Pandemic on the Technology and Innovation Management Research AgendaOpenAlex

Gerard George, Karim R. Lakhani, Phanish Puranam

19“In the office nine to five, five days a week… those days are gone”: qualitative exploration of diplomatic personnel’s experiences of remote working during the COVID-19 pandemicOpenAlex

Samantha K. Brooks, Charlotte E. Hall, Dipti Patel, et al.

32Distance: digital immersive technologies and craft engagementOpenAlex

Inge Panneels, Ingi Helgason, Michael Smyth, et al.

53Remote work transition amidst COVID-19: Impacts on presenteeism, absenteeism, and worker well-being-A scoping review.PubMed

Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia, Alexia M Haritos, Bao-Zhu Stephanie Long, et al.

PLoS One. 2024 Jul 18;19(7):e0307087. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307087. eCollection 2024.

57Implications of the COVID‐19 Pandemic for Gender Equity Issues at WorkOpenAlex

Frances J. Milliken, Madeline King Kneeland, Elinor Flynn

58Gender Equity Considerations for Tenure and Promotion during COVID‐19OpenAlex

Merin Oleschuk

61Benefits and Limitations of Remote Work to LGBTQIA+ Software ProfessionalsOpenAlex

Ronnie de Souza Santos, Cleyton Magalhães, Paul Ralph

62A millennial manager skills model for the new remote work environmentOpenAlex

Kerri M. Camp, Marilyn Young, Stephen C. Bushardt

71Work Flexibility, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance among Romanian Employees—Implications for Sustainable Human Resource ManagementOpenAlex

Adriana AnaMaria Davidescu, Simona Andreea Apostu, Andreea Paul, et al.

77Work-life balance and its impact in modern organizations: An HR reviewOpenAlex

Binaebi Gloria Bello, Sunday Tubokirifuruar Tula, Ganiyu Bolawale Omotoye, et al.

81Dietary Rhythmicity and Mental Health Among Airline Personnel.PubMed

Erliang Zhang, Huilun Li, Hangyu Han, et al.

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jul 1;7(7):e2422266. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.22266.

Suppr 超能文献

Suppr 超能文献

远程与混合办公模式对组织绩效及员工幸福感的影响研究综述

1. 概念界定与研究演进

1.1 远程办公与混合办公的核心内涵

1.2 相关研究的发展脉络

2. 远程与混合办公对组织绩效的作用机制与效果

2.1 对生产率的双向影响

2.2 对协作成本的影响特征

3. 远程与混合办公对员工幸福感的影响路径与特征

3.1 工作生活平衡的双向效应

3.2 对心理健康的影响机制

4. 影响效应的异质性分析：以性别差异为核心

4.1 性别维度的差异表现

4.2 其他维度的异质性特征

5. 适配远程与混合办公的管理模式变革研究

5.1 传统管理模式的适配性挑战

5.2 新型管理模式的探索与效果验证

6. 远程与混合办公的落地实践优化建议

6.1 组织绩效提升类举措

6.2 员工幸福感保障类举措

7. 现有研究局限与未来展望

7.1 当前研究的核心不足

7.2 未来研究方向

参考文献

1Work from Home before and after the COVID-19 OutbreakOpenAlex

2How Hybrid Working From Home Works OutOpenAlex

3Hybrid Work gestalten: welche Faktoren ein gutes hybrides Arbeitsmodell bestimmenOpenAlex

4What is hybrid work? Towards greater conceptual clarity of a common term and understanding its consequencesOpenAlex

5HYBRID WORK MODELS FOR A CHANGING WORK ENVIRONMENTOpenAlex

6What is a digital nomad? Definition and taxonomy in the era of mainstream remote workOpenAlex

7COVID‐19 and the New Technologies of Organizing: Digital Exhaust, Digital Footprints, and Artificial Intelligence in the Wake of Remote WorkOpenAlex

8What has changed? The Impact of Covid Pandemic on the Technology and Innovation Management Research AgendaOpenAlex

9Telework and Social Services in Spain during the COVID-19 Pandemic.PubMed

10Transition to Online Education in Schools during a SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic in GeorgiaOpenAlex

11Remote and hybrid work research: key trends and thematic developments over two decadesOpenAlex

12Does working from home work? That depends on the home.PubMed

13Hybrid Work meets Agile Software Development: A Systematic Mapping StudyOpenAlex

14The Evolution of Work from HomeOpenAlex

15A dual pathway model of remote work intensity: A meta‐analysis of its simultaneous positive and negative effectsOpenAlex

16Telework, work organisation and job quality during the COVID-19 crisis: a qualitative studyOpenAlex

17Investigating the Impact of Remote Working on Employee Productivity and Work-life Balance: A Study on the Business Consultancy Industry in Dubai, UAEOpenAlex

18The Role of Remote Work in Enhancing Employee Productivity: Evidence from the US-Based Tech Industry During the COVID-19 PandemicOpenAlex

19“In the office nine to five, five days a week… those days are gone”: qualitative exploration of diplomatic personnel’s experiences of remote working during the COVID-19 pandemicOpenAlex

20The digital economy: Challenges and opportunities in the new era of technology and electronic communicationsOpenAlex

21Proposed Empirical Assessment of Remote Workers' Cyberslacking and Computer Security Posture to Assess Organizational Cybersecurity RisksOpenAlex

22Towards Assessing Organizational Cybersecurity Risks via Remote Workers’ Cyberslacking and Their Computer Security PostureOpenAlex

23Strategic human resource management in the 21st century: A review of trends and innovationsOpenAlex

24Work during COVID-19: assessing the influence of job demands and resources on practical and psychological outcomes for employeesOpenAlex

25What Jobs are Being Done at Home During the Covid-19 Crisis? Evidence from Firm-Level SurveysOpenAlex

26The need to work from home in higher education during the first phase of COVID-19: Employee productivity, autonomy, work relationships, job satisfaction and well-beingOpenAlex

27The effect of goal setting leadership on motivation and work productivity moderated with remote working in the healthcare industryOpenAlex

28Social norms in digital spaces: Conflict reports and implications for technology design in the teleworking context.PubMed

29[Virtual hallway chats and status updates: collaboration in avatar-based work environments].PubMed

30Towards Knowledge Intensive Inter-Organizational Systems in HealthcareOpenAlex

31Towards Knowledge Intensive Inter-Organizational Systems in HealthcareOpenAlex

32Distance: digital immersive technologies and craft engagementOpenAlex

33[An Integrated Concept for Sustainable Hybrid Work-Findings and Recommendations for Action from a Transformation Project].PubMed

34The Effects of Working Remotely on Employee Productivity and Work-Life BalanceOpenAlex

35REMOTE WORK AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING: EXPLORING THE IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING, JOB SATISFACTION, AND WORK-LIFE BALANCEOpenAlex

36The Role of Flexible Work Arrangements in Enhancing Employee Well-Being and Productivity: A Study on SDG 8 Implementation in TechCompaniesOpenAlex

37Work, life and <scp>COVID</scp>‐19: a rapid review and practical recommendations for the <scp>post‐pandemic</scp> workplaceOpenAlex

38Relationship Between Flexible Work Arrangements, Well-Being, and Performance of Employees During the COVID -19 PandemicOpenAlex

39Remote workers’ perceived health during the COVID-19 pandemic: an exploratory study of influencing factors in the IT and communications sector in MaltaOpenAlex

40Flexible working, work–family conflict, and maternal gatekeeping: The daily experiences of dual‐earner couplesOpenAlex

41Discourse or reality?OpenAlex

42Topophilia, Placemaking, and Boundary WorkOpenAlex

43Social service providers under COVID-19 duress: adaptation, burnout, and resilienceOpenAlex

44Flourishing With Flexibility: Leader Communicative Support of Flexible Work Arrangements Enhances Employee Engagement and Well-BeingOpenAlex

45Well‐balanced families?OpenAlex

46Achieving Effective Remote Working During the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Work Design PerspectiveOpenAlex

47Navigating the new normal: How workplace isolation impacted teleworkers' psychological well-being in Covid-19? The roles of perceived organizational support and job insecurity.PubMed

48The effect of emotion regulation difficulties and loneliness on anxiety, depression, and stress levels in remote workers.PubMed

49Association of workplace infection control and perceived organizational support on worker loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic.PubMed

50Mindfulness-Based Approaches for COVID-19 Mental Health in Working from Home.PubMed

51Telecommuting and COVID-19: how has the pandemic changed workers' perception on physical and mental health?PubMed

52Coping With Stress and Burnout Associated With Telecommunication and Online Learning.PubMed

53Remote work transition amidst COVID-19: Impacts on presenteeism, absenteeism, and worker well-being-A scoping review.PubMed

54Relationship between alcohol consumption and telecommuting preference-practice mismatch during the COVID-19 pandemic.PubMed

55Effect of Working from Home on the Association between Job Demands and Psychological Distress.PubMed