Perceived Proximity in Virtual Work: Explaining the Paradox of Far-but-Close

Abstract

One's colleagues can be situated in close physical proximity, yet seem quite distant. Conversely, one's colleagues can be quite far away in objective terms, yet seem quite close. In this paper, we explore this paradoxical phenomenon of feeling close to geographically distant colleagues and propose a model of perceived proximity (a dyadic and asymmetric construct which reflects one person's perception of how close or how far another person is). The model shows how communication and social identification processes, as well as certain individual and socio-organizational factors, affect feelings of proximity. The aim is to broaden organizational studies' theoretical understandings of proximity to include the subjective perception of it. By shifting the focus from objective to perceived proximity, we believe that scholars can resolve many conflicting findings regarding dispersed work. By understanding what leads to perceived proximity, we also believe that managers can achieve many of the benefits of co-location without actually having employees work in one place.

Collaboration in open-plan offices

“…Wilson et al (2008) argue that people may collaborate at a physical distance because they feel close to one another, but do not explain how people who are physically close are able to avoid collaboration. Furthermore, the concept of perceived proximity does not address the idea that physical environments are not open to endless interpretations, and that the physical form of work environments directs how people come to understand and use them (Gaver, 1996).…”

“…In the context of this debate, Wilson, O'Leary, Metiu, and Jett (2008) argue that it is not physical proximity between people, but employees' subjective feelings about the distance between people that shapes collaboration. By contrasting physical proximity with perceived proximity, they argue that individuals may feel emotionally close to people who are very far away (e.g.…”

“…particular physical features cause particular behaviours). In seeking to overcome this problem, Wilson et al (2008) describe the difference between physical proximity, which is the objective distance between team members, and perceived proximity, which relates to how close team members feel, suggesting that the latter causes interaction. The key limitation of Wilson and colleagues' argument is that it privileges employees' perceptions of proximity over the actual physical opportunities and constraints presented by the physical work environment, and focuses on proximity over other elements of the physical context (i.e.…”

“…Pepper, 2008), or individual explanations (e.g. Wilson et al, 2008) Overall, when employees share an office with others who have similar personal characteristics (e.g. sociability) and are working on similar tasks, they are better able to empathise with each other's needs (e.g.…”

Connecting Emotional Spiritual Quotient and Employment Status with Performance

“…According to Fulton (2005) spiritual quotient also lead to an enhanced ability to find joy in the small things in life and make it easier to remain focused. Employment status is a major determinant of the exchange relationship between individuals and the employing organisation (Wilson et al, 2008). The literature suggests that casual employment does not measure up well on many dimensions of security that constitute permanent employment (Paramio and Zofío, 2008).…”