Does fun work? The complexity of promoting fun at work

Abstract

For some years now there has been growing enthusiasm amongst practitioners, managers and some academics about the value of promoting fun at work, resulting in a substantial body of managerial literature. As a result, the authors believe that fun at work deserves further research attention. In this paper the authors critically review the large body of practitioner and management literature promoting fun at work. We find this literature dependent on a number of untheorised, untested assumptions about the nature of fun, its desirability and usefulness to business. Utilising Schein’s organisational theory, alongside ethnographic research into fun at work, we highlight the complexity of implementing fun at work initiatives in practice. Drawing on organizational psychology we also make a short case study of the current use of fun at work as a job marketing tool by recruitment agencies in New Zealand. Our discussion does make it possible to come to some conclusions about fun at work. However, we also pose a series of research questions that emerge from our discussion that will provide a framework for ongoing research.

‘I always have fun at work’: How ‘remarkable workers’ employ agency and control in order to enjoy themselves

“…A growing body of literature has investigated workplace fun (Owler, Morrison, & Plester, 2010; Plester & Hutchison, 2016), with most authors seeking to describe managerial attempts to create and utilise ‘social’ fun at work to influence worker engagement and productivity (e.g., Becker & Tews, 2016; Fine & Corte, 2017; Fluegge-Woolf, 2014). Few authors have examined the investment by individuals, or the strategic attempts that individuals make, to create and sustain an experience of fun for themselves (Owler & Morrison, 2012; Plester, Cooper-Thomas, & Winquist, 2015).…”

“…On the other hand, the initiatives may not suit the workers or place pressure on them to act in a certain way. For instance, workers may not respond well if they feel that management is placing a higher priority on fun than other more important aspects of worker wellbeing or productivity (Baptiste, 2009; Fleming, 2005; Owler, Morrison, & Plester, 2010; Warren & Fineman, 2007). Clancy and Linehan (2019) found that workers were more amenable to management-led fun initiatives if they perceived that they were implemented for their benefit, rather than the organisation's benefit.…”

Exploring Fun as a Job Resource: The Enhancing and Protecting Role of a Key Modern Workplace Factor

“…These heterogeneous definitions make it difficult to determine what fun is, but they do depict the many different uses of fun in the literature which are a result of the many activities and behaviours that can be considered fun. The definitions are limited to presenting a few activities and behaviours, which reflect the problems inherent in trying to find a comprehensive definition, as what is fun is both subjective and context related (Owler et al 2010). In the literature, three main clusters of fun activities and behaviours have already been identified helping researchers to better understand and operationalize the concept of fun; managed (fun activities initiated or supported by the organization), organic (activities that the employees engage in by themselves), and task related, but, little has been done so far to clearly distinguish among them (Plester et al 2015).…”

“…The organizational culture itself seems to play an important role. Owler et al (2010) based on Schein's framework for understanding organizational culture described how espoused values (second level) like fun at work might not reflect the underlying assumptions and values that exist at a deeper organizational level (third level) and thus cause contradictions, incongruities and dissonance. The probability of controlled fun resulting in negative outcomes is possible when they do not reflect the values of the organization or when management is not perceived as benevolent.…”

Fun and positive experiences in the workplace

“…These heterogeneous definitions make it difficult to determine what fun is, but they do depict the many different uses of fun in the literature which are a result of the many activities and behaviours that can be considered fun. The definitions are limited to presenting a few activities and behaviours, which reflect the problems inherent in trying to find a comprehensive definition, as what is fun is both subjective and context related (Owler, Morrison, & Plester, 2010). In the literature, three main clusters of fun activities and behaviours have already been identified helping researchers to better understand and operationalize the concept of fun; managed fun (fun activities initiated or supported by the organization), organic fun (activities that the employees engage to by themselves), and task related fun, but, little has been done so far to clearly distinguish among them (Plester et al 2015).…”