Search results

Work environments are undergoing a transformation where organizations have various spatial solutions at their disposal. However, organizations may have challenges in making the right decisions in a work environment change, when the spatial solution is only one dimension of the work environment. The purpose of this paper is to approach this problem in a holistic way and explain the relationship between work environment changes and the development of organizational performance in the activity-based work (ABW) environment.

The results are based on an extensive quantitative survey involving 471 participants. The survey was theory driven and built on former literature. The participants were randomly collected from the largest cities in Finland, and the data were analyzed with a regression analysis.

The results showed that ABW environments require no more attention to the different work environment dimensions when compared to other office types, with the exception of the social work environment; the changes of which have a relatively strong relationship with the development of organizational well-being. In the ABW environment, a change in the physical work environment has a stronger relationship with the development of organizational productivity and a change in the social work environment has a stronger relationship with the development of organizational well-being than a change in the other work environment dimensions.

This study yields empirical evidence of the relationship of physical, digital and social work environment changes with the development of organizational performance in the ABW environment. The value of this paper is that it offers a simple but holistic research model to distinguish the outcomes between the different work environment dimensions so that relevant expertise is applied to take concrete and targeted action.

Work environments are undergoing a transition and COVID-19 accelerated this change. Prior studies have associated various physical, digital and social work environment elements with occupational well-being. However, holistic approaches to the social work environment to compare the effects of the different elements have received less attention. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship of various social work environment elements with hybrid worker well-being. The findings help organizations design their work environments and cultures for the post-COVID era.

The study builds on a quantitative survey with 1,057 respondents. The respondents were randomly selected, the answers were anonymous and the results were based on regression analysis.

The analysis indicated that working methods and practices, leadership and management practices, organizational communality and social interaction associate with hybrid worker well-being. Organizational values, reward systems and organizational structures yield no association with hybrid worker well-being.

The value of this paper is in that it investigates elements of the social work environment, presents a research model that examines the relationship of social work environment elements with hybrid worker well-being and provides new empirical data on their implications in a comparative manner.

The purpose is to examine the connection between leadership and its proximal and distal outcomes on employee, team and organization-level outcomes. As a more practical endeavor, a leadership measurement is constructed and validated.

The study takes a quantitative approach, statistically analyzing 301 online survey responses to a survey of leader attributes and their organizational impacts.

This study shows that the impact of leadership is associated more with actionable behaviors than personality traits. More specifically, leader success leans on leader dependability, management mode, emotive skills and coaching style, which relate to organizational outcomes. Additionally, preventative conflict management belongs to immediate supervisory foci, whereas already escalated conflicts ought to be outsourced to e.g. HR. Further, the findings verify that management is even more about communication than previously understood. Interestingly, employee satisfaction does not predict willingness to stay and is therefore irrelevant as a predictor of employee retention. This verifies the role of satisfaction as a proximal outcome and a post-goal state. Finally, the role of psychological safety is incoherent and equivocal in relation to organizational outcomes.

As a practical ramification, we devise an instrument, the Leadership Impact Inventory, for (1) diagnosing the quality and effect of organizational leadership in an easy-to-adopt, cost-effective and quick manner and (2) analyzing the influence of various leadership dimensions on satisfaction and goals on individual, team and organizational levels.

This study expands the earlier body of research on leader influence to factors promoting not only proximal outcomes that are typically post-goal states but also distal outcomes. Further, it examines outcomes on all organizational levels, as an extension to prior studies which are typically limited to the entire organization. Finally, the study does not explore leadership as a force or process separate from culture but rather appreciates their synergy through the inclusion of cultural features. This is achieved by monitoring leader success with such subjective aspects describing employee experience and organizational culture that are associated with follower performance.