Work Design

Morgeson, Frederick P.; Garza, Adela S.; Campion, Michael A.

doi:10.1002/9781118133880.hop212020

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 244 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the IWDF suggests that “structural influences” related to the broader work setting—including technological and physical elements—may shape employees’ perceived work characteristics. Based on this, Morgeson and colleagues (2012) proposed that virtual work settings may influence work characteristics, but they stopped short of specifying the pertinent aspects of virtual work and called for more research in this area. Thus, in this review, we contextualize the IWDF for a virtual work setting by identifying subdimensions of technology dependence and dispersion that impact well-being through their influence on employees’ work characteristics in the four categories mentioned earlier.…”

Section: Review Methodology: a Work Design Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, employees working from out-of-office locations may lack access to necessary equipment, resulting in work delays that cause frustration and exhaustion. This relates to the work context characteristic of “equipment use,” which Morgeson et al (2012: 538) described as a “largely unrecognized contextual characteristic.” We also see interesting opportunities to identify knowledge characteristics that mediate positive effects of virtual work on well-being rather than the mostly negative effects associated with this work characteristic category in our review. For example, the knowledge characteristic of enhanced problem solving in the IWDF may help explain how asynchronicity can support well-being by enabling employees to take time to process and reflect on information they receive.…”

Section: Future Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our review shows that virtual work influences well-being by changing employees’ perceptions of their work characteristics (i.e., the design of work). Thus, we apply a work design theoretical lens (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Morgeson, Garza, & Campion, 2012; Parker, 2014) to develop an integrative framework for understanding how virtual work both helps and harms well-being through its influence on perceived work characteristics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, our framework addresses calls to extend work design theorizing to reflect the contemporary workplace (e.g., Morgeson et al, 2012; Parker, Morgeson, & Johns, 2017). We draw on Morgeson and colleagues’ (2012) integrated work design framework (IWDF), which integrates major work design theories. However, these theories assume in-person, face-to-face work that is separated by a clear boundary from employees’ nonwork context (Oldham & Hackman, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Unpacking Virtual Work's Dual Effects on Employee Well-Being: An Integrative Review and Future Research Agenda

Hill

Axtell

Raghuram

et al. 2022

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virtual work arrangements, whereby dispersed employees interact with each other using technology-mediated communication, can both positively and negatively impact their psychological well-being. Yet, research on these dual effects in different virtual work research domains (e.g., telecommuting, virtual teams, and computer-mediated work) is not well integrated, which limits insights into how their findings overlap and inform each other. Using a work design theoretical lens to synthesize findings from 115 empirical articles, we develop an integrative framework that advances understanding of how virtual work both helps and harms employee well-being. The framework explicates different pathways linking subdimensions of technology dependence and dispersion—two core dimensions underlying different types of virtual work—to well-being through employees’ perceived work characteristics. We identify four technology dependence and three dispersion subdimensions that differ in their degree of positive versus negative impact on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being outcomes as well as in the work characteristics that explain these effects. These findings suggest that employees’ well-being experiences in virtual work depend on the subdimensions involved and that the same subdimension can influence well-being both positively and negatively. Across the subdimensions, a dominant set of work characteristics in four categories (task, knowledge, social, and work context) explain virtual work’s dual effects on well-being, moderated by contingencies at different levels (individual, team, organization, and external context). These multilevel contingencies point to potential interventions for enhancing the benefits and mitigating the downsides of virtual work for employee well-being. Based on these insights, we develop a future research agenda and discuss practical implications.

show abstract

Section: Review Methodology: a Work Design Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Unpacking Virtual Work's Dual Effects on Employee Well-Being: An Integrative Review and Future Research Agenda

Hill

Axtell

Raghuram

et al. 2022

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The multilevel well‐being paradox: Towards an integrative process theory of coping in teams

Nordbäck,

Nurmi,

Gibbs

et al. 2024

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryContemporary work teams are increasingly faced with external pressures and changing demands that thrust them into stressful conditions that require coping to maintain not only performance but also well‐being. In this paper, we treat the COVID‐19 pandemic as an extreme case of multilevel stressors and coping in teams to investigate how teams and their members simultaneously cope with stressors at both individual and team levels and the impacts this has on their well‐being. We conducted a longitudinal qualitative multi‐case study involving 12 teams, utilizing data from 69 members collected through diaries, interviews, and surveys over a period of 6 months. Our findings illustrate how the needs and coping efforts of teams and individuals can sometimes conflict, resulting in opposing states of well‐being at different levels. We frame this phenomenon as the multilevel well‐being paradox. Our emergent process model of multilevel coping in teams suggests that teams thrive when they establish a shared appraisal of stressors and coping options through active team reflection, and when they adopt coping approaches that align with the specific stressors experienced at both levels. This study advances our understanding of coping in teams by illuminating the intricate interplay between team and individual well‐being and highlighting the paradoxical nature of this relationship.

show abstract

Sozio-digitale Innovation durch partizipative Prozessgestaltung im virtuellen Raum

Müller,

Hamborg,

Straatmann

et al. 2023

Digitalisierung Der Arbeitswelt Im Mittelstand 3

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Work Design

Cited by 12 publications

References 244 publications

Unpacking Virtual Work's Dual Effects on Employee Well-Being: An Integrative Review and Future Research Agenda

Unpacking Virtual Work's Dual Effects on Employee Well-Being: An Integrative Review and Future Research Agenda

The multilevel well‐being paradox: Towards an integrative process theory of coping in teams

Sozio-digitale Innovation durch partizipative Prozessgestaltung im virtuellen Raum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About