ArticlePDF Available

Communication technology use and multiple workplace identifications among organizational teleworkers with varied degrees of virtuality

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Although over 11 million virtual workers in the USA are classified as teleworkers, we know relatively little about them. Drawing on the construct of telepresence, the relationships among four sets of variables seem especially important: actual communication technology use, identifications with aspects of work, degree of virtuality, and various teleworker demographic characteristics. A survey of 86 teleworkers in a wide range of organizations revealed that basic telephone and voicemail are the most frequently used and most vital communication technologies. However, several differences in technology use based on message content and interaction partners also exist. Additionally, moderately virtual teleworkers are more identified with their work team, organization, and occupation than are those who telework small or large portions of their work week. Also, use of advanced phone technologies is most predictive of organizational and occupational identification. Among the implications discussed are: equipping teleworkers with appropriate communication technologies and establishing telework programs where workers are only virtual for a portion of the working week
Content may be subject to copyright.
240 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
Communication Technology
Use and Multiple Workplace
Identifications Among
Organizational Teleworkers with
Varied Degrees of Virtuality
—CRAIG R. SCOTT AND
C. ERIK TIMMERMAN
Manuscript received June 7, 1999;
revised August 31, 1999.
The authors are with the
Communication Studies Department,
University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712 USA
(email: crscott@mail.utexas.edu).
IEEE PII S 0361-1434(99)09564-8.
Abstract—Although over 11 million virtual workers in this country
are classified as teleworkers, we know relatively little about them.
Drawing on the construct of telepresence, the relationships among
four sets of variables seem especially important: actual communi-
cation technology use, identifications with aspects of work, degree
of virtuality, and various teleworker demographic characteristics. A
survey of 86 teleworkers in a wide range of organizations revealed
that basic telephone and voicemail are the most frequently used and
most vital communication technologies; however, several differences in
technology use based on message content and interaction partners also
exist. Additionally, moderately virtual teleworkers are more identified
with their work team, organization, and occupation than are those
who telework small or large portions of their work week. Also, use
of advanced phone technologies is most predictive of organizational
and occupational identification. Among the implications discussed are
equipping teleworkers with appropriate communication technologies
and establishing telework programs where workers are only virtual
for a portion of the work week.
Index TermsCommunication technology, identification, telepres-
ence, telework, teleworker, virtual worker, virtuality.
One of the many changes in
organizations today has been the
move toward more virtual forms
of work that allow organizational
employees to perform their jobs
outside traditional notions of place
and time. As we focus on these
new organizational and interor-
ganizational structures (e.g., vir-
tual, boundaryless, or network
organizations [1]), this blurring
of boundaries makes the idea that
work can be performed anywhere
increasingly conceivable [2]. One of
the most visible manifestations of
the virtual organization is known
as telework, defined as “the prac-
tice of an employee performing
his or her normal duties from a
remote location, typically home,
on a full- or part-time basis” [3, p.
0361–1434/99$10.00 1999 IEEE
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 241
462]. Indeed, several scholars have
discussed telework in the context
of virtual offices, virtual organiza-
tions, and the virtual workplace
[3]–[7].
Recent estimates reveal that a
significant portion of the workforce
in this country can be described as
teleworkers. Current figures indi-
cate just over 11 million telework-
ers [8], [9]. Some recent predictions
have suggested that up to 80%
of organizations will have 50% of
their staff teleworking by 1999 [3].
Furthermore, the U.S. Department
of Transportation recently pre-
dicted 15 million telecommuters
by 2002, representing 10.5% of
the total workforce and 17.5%
of all information workers [10].
Other experts have predicted that
telecommuters will constitute a
full third of the adult workforce
by 2020 [11]. Despite the current
interest and future speculations,
telework itself is nothing new.
Sales personnel, service repre-
sentatives, and various others
have been working away from
the main office for decades. How-
ever, today’s teleworkers are using
much more technology and are
much more untethered from the
office [12]. Indeed, two important
trends in organizations and two
key issues for telework are the use
of communication technologies
and the degree of attachment to
places like the organization.
In many ways, it is the growth of
various communication technolo-
gies in organizations that makes
telework possible, especially for
information workers. Of the ap-
proximately 11 million teleworkers
today, 8.3 million own a PC and
3.4 million use email at home
[9]. However, in general, we know
very little about the specific com-
munication technologies used by
teleworkers, their importance to
the teleworker, the types of mes-
sage they are used for, with whom
they communicate when they do
use them, and the outcomes that
may be associated with the use of
different communication technolo-
gies. One of those outcomes that
has received minimal attention in
this literature is the attachment
teleworkers may feel to various
facets of their employing organi-
zation. Although several anecdotal
examples of increased loyalty can
be found in the literature [9], [13],
[14], empirical research on this
subject is truly scarce. Much of the
existing scholarship on telework
has been too superficial, generally
focusing on isolated case studies
that fail to present wider pictures
of this movement [7].
We suggest that not only are issues
of communication technology use
and attachment (what we will term
identification) of great concern
for virtual organizations and their
employees, but these two issues
may be related to one another in
a contradictory way. For example,
the communication technologies
organizations provide their tele-
workers can be used to reinforce
organizational identification by
providing messages about who the
company is and what it values;
but those same technologies may
also afford individuals with more
information about opportunities
at other companies—limiting their
identification with a single em-
ployer. Similarly, the very tech-
nologies that provide organiza-
tional teleworkers with the free-
dom and flexibility they desire, also
allow them to be further removed
from key aspects of the organi-
zation that may be necessary for
identification with one’s employer.
These contradictions have impor-
tant implications for organizations
and their members, and are espe-
cially salient for teleworkers.
Despite these possible connec-
tions, surprisingly little research
has explicitly examined the rela-
tionship between new communica-
tion technologies and identification
with various aspects of one’s work.
Furthermore, teleworkers vary
in their degree of virtuality, or
amount of time actually spent
doing remote work [7], as well
as along other key demographic
characteristics; however, we have
little data to suggest how these
differences may affect either com-
munication technology use or mul-
tiple identifications. Thus, our goal
in this paper is to both describe
communication technology use by
teleworkers and to explore the rela-
tionships between communication
technology use, multiple identifi-
cations, teleworker virtuality, and
several key demographics. To that
end, we begin with a review of
the literature on telework, framing
it in the theoretical scholarship
on telepresence. The focus on
telepresence leads to research
questions concerning the four
constructs mentioned above. Next,
we describe the survey question-
naire methodology we used to
explore these issues. From there,
we present the results of that
questionnaire. We end with a dis-
cussion of the findings, implica-
tions for teleworkers and their
employers, as well as directions
for future research.
TELEWORK AND TELEPRESENCE
Although the idea of telework and
the term telecommuting date back
to the oil crisis of the early 1970s,
the forces that drive telework today
are personal (e.g., employee flexi-
bility and blurring of work/family
boundaries), organizational (e.g.,
dispersed structures and efforts to
improve productivity), and societal
(e.g., environmental concerns) in
nature [15]. Similar to telework,
which is the term we use here,
telecommuting can be defined as
“work carried out in a location
where, remote from central of-
fices or production facilities, the
worker has no personal contact
with co-workers, but is able to
communicate with them using the
communications technologies” [16,
p. 306]. Although teleworkers can
include the self-employed, those
that work from their homes, and
even those that take work home
[16], most estimates of telework-
ers are more limited and do not
include homemakers or the self-
employed.
Much of what has been written
about teleworking takes the form
242 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
of how-to guidelines and practition-
er-oriented articles. Only 32 em-
pirical studies of telework were
published prior to 1998 [15]. Most
of the existing literature on tele-
work has been concerned with
issues of productivity. For exam-
ple, one study reported general
productivity increases of 10–40%
for teleworkers [9], and another
mentioned gains of 20–30% [3].
However, based on his review of
studies reporting 10–144% in-
creases in productivity, Westfall
has generally concluded that most
of this research is based on subjec-
tive estimates of productivity gains
[7]. Another issue of great interest
has been work focusing on the
work–family conflict. One review of
literature led to the conclusion
that telework helps to balance
work–family conflict (rather than
contribute to it) [17]. Other studies
also indicate that telework gener-
ally allows for a stronger family
focus [3], [8].
Although issues of productivity
and work–family conflict are of
importance, they represent only
a portion of the relevant research
constructs when it comes to virtual
workers. Normally, one might turn
to existing theoretical work in the
area to suggest additional lines
of inquiry; however, theoretical
work in this body of literature is
generally lacking [4]. Given our
view of telework as a manifestation
of virtual organizing involving work
from remote locations, we believe
that the writing on telepresence
provides a useful point of depar-
ture for scholarship in this area.
Although the research we report in
this study is primarily descriptive
(we are not attempting to test any
predications about telepresence
specifically), the telepresence con-
struct provides a useful conceptual
base for suggesting other variables
of importance to telework (beyond
productivity and work–family con-
flict).
Telepresence is often described
as feeling like you are actually
“there” [18], and Steuer defines
it as “the experience of presence
in an environment by means of a
communication medium” [19, p.
76]. The experience of presence
can take many forms, but perhaps
the most applicable to telework is
presence as transportation [18].
This view suggests that a sense of
presence, or being there, is created
by communication technologies
that seem to take us somewhere,
that bring others to us, or that
create some shared space in which
multiple parties may interact. The
term telepresence describes the
experience of being present in an
alternate (i.e., distant) environ-
ment via media technology—rather
than, or in addition to, mere phys-
ical presence in the immediate
surroundings. The telepresence
construct has strong connections
to virtual work in that a virtual
reality can be defined as any en-
vironment (real or simulated) in
which one experiences telepres-
ence [19]. Although previous work
has extended this definition of
virtual reality to a range of contexts
and communication media, and
even though telepresence has been
discussed in light of telemedicine,
distance learning, telepsychiatry,
and other fields [18], it has not
specifically been applied to tele-
work. We believe telework repre-
sents a type of virtual environment
where the teleworker perceives
some degree of telepresence in,
or connection with, an environ-
ment (a technology-mediated cen-
tral/main office) other than his or
her physical surroundings. As the
transportation view of telepresence
would suggest, the teleworker can
be brought to the main office,
the main office can seemingly be
brought to the teleworker, or the
two can meet in a more virtual
space.
In applying the telepresence con-
struct to telework, we see four sets
of relevant variables. First, per-
haps the most central elements for
both telework and telepresence are
the communication technologies
that provide linkages to others.
These communication technolo-
gies provide the mediated sense
of being there that defines telep-
resence and are regarded as cru-
cial to most employees’ ability
to telework. Second, telepresence
would suggest that one important
outcome for individual teleworkers
might be the degree of connected-
ness or sense of belonging they feel
with others. We see identification
as a rich organizational construct
that begins to capture this idea.
Third, one’s degree of participation
in a telework program may shape
the amount of time in which actual
physical presence and perceived
telepresence are experienced. We
label this participation virtuality,
and use it to provide a measure
of the amount of time one might
be telepresent as a teleworker.
Finally, the telepresence literature
suggests that telepresence is ex-
perienced individually and varies
from person to person. Thus, a
final set of variables relevant to
this research centers on demo-
graphic characteristics of tele-
workers. Fig. 1 depicts the rela-
tionships between these four vari-
ables suggested by the application
of telepresence to telework. We
turn next to a development of
specific arguments to link these
variables together.
KEY TELEWORK CONSTRUCTS BASED
ON TELEPRESENCE FRAMEWORK
Communication Technology
Usage As noted previously, most
definitions of both telework and
telepresence include the use of
communication technology [5],
[19]. In many ways, communi-
cation technology use provides a
real focal point for understanding
telework. Without question, tele-
work’s growing popularity is facil-
itated in large part by the growth
of new communication technolo-
gies. “Spurred by advances in
information technologies, many
organizations have begun experi-
menting with virtual ways of work-
ing” [20, paragraph 1]. Whether
we talk about these in terms of
telework, virtual offices and or-
ganizations, or mobile workers,
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 243
these new ways of organizing are
very much concerned with the
use of communication technology.
Further, the growth of information
technologies has coincided with
the environmental turbulence and
changing organizational forms of
recent years [2].
Because telework depends on the
use of communication technolo-
gies, it would also seem to be
strongly related to workers’ media
choices. Because teleworkers lack
the physical proximity necessary
for face-to-face interactions [21]
when they are working away from
a main office, a variety of other
communication technologies may
be used to facilitate interaction
with others. Zimmer contends
that the three primary methods
of communication for telework-
ers are voice (including phones,
voicemail, and other advanced
voice features), fax, and electronic
mail; two emerging technologies
are videoconferencing and online
services [3]. Communication tech-
nologies commonly mentioned by
others for their ability to support
virtual workers include voice and
electronic mail [14]; fax, audiocon-
ferencing, and videoconferencing
[22]; groupware systems [4]; and
basic phone services and written
documents [20]. We see these, as
well as several other communica-
tion technologies explored in other
studies [23], [24] as potentially
relevant to telework. The varied
use of communication technolo-
gies by teleworkers is important in
that individuals who can express
themselves through various media
will likely make better teleworkers
[25].
Although some of the telework
research has explored the multiple
communication technologies that
may be used with this type of
work, assessments of other qual-
ities of teleworker communication
technology use have not received
attention. One of the most obvious
characteristics is frequency of use,
which reveals technology prefer-
ences of teleworkers across a range
of activities. Indeed, inadequate
frequency of communication be-
tween managers and teleworkers
has been blamed as a main cause
of telework program failures [26].
Another characteristic is the vital
importance of these technologies
for accomplishing telework. In
general, usefulness perceptions
have emerged as a primary pre-
dictor of intentions to use certain
communication technologies [27].
In the telework research more
specifically, there has been some
debate about the extent to which
computer technology is necessary
for telework [15], which suggests
that some communication tech-
nologies may be more vital than
others. Additionally, communica-
tive messages are often divided
based on their function [28], such
as task, social, and innovation. In
their discussion of virtual workers,
one set of researchers noted specif-
ically that social interaction, as
well as task, is an important issue
[4]. Finally, a communication per-
spective would be interested in the
specific interaction partners with
whom teleworkers communicate
via these technologies. Although
some of the literature certainly
talks about communicating with
colleagues and various members of
the organization [4], it rarely spec-
ifies differences between cowork-
ers, supervisors, and other or-
ganizational members. Further-
more, even though some literature
addresses communicating with
customers [16], the research has
not examined differences in how
teleworkers might use communi-
cation technologies to interact with
others internal and external to
the organization. The importance
of these aspects of teleworkers’
communication technology use
and the lack of previous work on
these issues leads us to an initial
research question:
RQ1: How do teleworkers use
and evaluate various com-
munication technologies
(in terms of frequency,
importance, content, and
interaction partners)?
Fig. 1. Research variables and questions suggested by applying telepresence framework to teleworkers.
244 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
Multiple Identifications In us-
ing telepresence as a conceptual
framework here, one logical out-
come is the extent to which tele-
workers actually feel attached to
or connected with aspects of a
mediated environment. This sort
of connection is well captured
by the construct of identifica-
tion. As a form of attachment,
identification has been defined as
“the perception of oneness with
or belongingness to (a collective),
where the individual defines him or
herself in terms of the (collective)
in which he or she is a member”
[29, p. 104].
Identification and related variables
have received some attention in
this literature. Although several
articles report on others’ findings
of increased loyalty by teleworkers,
the actual findings have often been
based on measures of turnover
intent [13], quotes from single in-
dividuals with vested teleworking
interests [9], [14], or even studies
of shift workers [30]. Thus, the
frequently voiced concern about
the degree of company loyalty,
or identification, teleworkers may
hold remains important. Organi-
zational communication research
has noted the importance of so-
cialization efforts in creating a
good person–organization fit [31].
Indeed, the teleworker may not
have the same socialization expe-
rience as those working on site
full time [12], which could create
a lessened sense of organizational
attachment. As one author argued,
“because virtual workers don’t
have everyday face-to-face inter-
action with fellow employees, their
personal and company ties can
be weaker than those of workers
in the traditional organization”
[25, p. 23]. His suggestion was
to select teleworkers who have
demonstrated their loyalty to the
company and to increase tele-
worker loyalty by sharing infor-
mation with them.
In the most extensive study of
this topic to date, Wiesenfeld,
Raghuram, and Garud argued
that the various technologies that
make telework possible may also
fray the ties that link members
to their employing organization
[20]. They have suggested that
identification may be especially im-
portant in virtual contexts because
it helps to facilitate coordination
and control, work group function-
ing, encouragement of extra-role
helping behaviors, and retention
of valuable employees. However,
the cues that traditionally have
led to organizational identification
are not as apparent in a virtual
context such as telework, due in
part to the reduced richness of
email and phone technologies used
to support telework. Wiesenfeld
et al.’s [20] study of teleworkers’
use of four communication me-
dia (face-to-face, electronic, doc-
ument, and phone) revealed two
interactions between virtual status
and communication medium. For
more virtual workers, frequency
of electronic communication re-
sulted in increased organizational
identification (less virtual work-
ers actually see a slight decline
in identification with increased
electronic communication). More
virtual workers were more identi-
fied than were less virtual workers,
but that difference declined with
increased phone communication.
Also useful here is some of the
theoretical work on the construct
of identification in the workplace.
Most organizational scholars and
practitioners are at least pass-
ingly familiar with the body of
research on organizational identi-
fication [32]–[35]. Recent research
on social identity theory and the
deindividuating effects associated
with computer-mediated commu-
nication (referred to as the SIDE
model by its authors) has begun
to link the areas of communica-
tion technology and identification
[36]–[39]. Additionally, the struc-
turational model of identification
[40] suggests two characteristics
of identification that are relevant
here.
First, identification in the work-
place is treated as situationally
variant. That is, different activities
or social contexts may result in
different degrees of identification,
which is a substantial break from
views of identification that assume
it to be stable across situations.
Because the situation is defined
largely by the tasks being done and
who is present, including the pos-
sibility that the individual is alone,
telework activities may be some-
what distinct from other types of
organizational activities. For the
teleworker, his/her activities do
not require the physical colocation
of others, and those others are
present only through the links
made possible by the communi-
cation technologies being used.
Although that theory stops short
of specifying how these sorts of
activities and this type of electronic
presence will affect identification,
the situated action view of identi-
fication does suggest an important
linkage between teleworkers’ use of
communication technologies and
their identifications.
Second, drawing on social identity
theory [41] and previous identifi-
cation work [32], [34], [42]–[46],
four especially relevant identifi-
cation targets for most organiza-
tional members are the individual
(personal interest), workgroup,
organization, and occupation [40].
These would also seem quite ap-
plicable to teleworkers. Addition-
ally, each of these targets may be
compatible or in competition with
one another, suggesting that they
may relate to various inputs and
outcomes differently. Although
several recent organizational com-
munication studies have explored
multiple targets of identification
simultaneously [47]–[50], no stud-
ies have actually measured the
multiple identifications relevant to
teleworkers or how those might
relate to their use of various com-
munication technologies. As we
noted in the introduction to this
article, the relationship between
these two sets of variables may
be contradictory and complex.
Thus, we pose a second research
question that treats identification
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 245
as an outcome of communication
technology use:
RQ2: How does teleworkers’
usage of communication
technologies affect iden-
tification with personal
interests, work team/de-
partment, organization,
and occupation?
Teleworker Virtuality The dis-
tinction between presence and
telepresence mentioned earlier
suggests the importance of the
extent to which the teleworker is
actually working at a distance. One
of the early myths about telework
was that it was an all-or-nothing
venture [22], [51]; however, few
teleworkers do all their work from
home [14]. Past research makes
it clear that teleworkers vary sub-
stantially in the amount of time
spent working at home [3] (as
opposed to in a company office).
Although the application of tele-
presence to telework suggests its
relevance, the degree of partici-
pation in a telework program has
received inadequate attention in
the telework literature [15]. We
label this amount of time spent
telecommuting as degree of virtu-
ality, which helps to capture the
extent to which a teleworker is a
virtual worker (as opposed to one
working in a more traditional main
office arrangement).
Degree of virtuality can be mea-
sured in terms of the percentage
of one’s workweek spent away
from the main office. Extant re-
search has used the number of
days spent in or away from the
office (measured in half-day in-
crements) to define virtual status
and has noted differences between
more- and less-virtual workers
[20]. Furthermore, there are im-
portant differences in cost/benefit
ratios depending on portion of
workweek spent telecommuting
[7]. Although some definitions of
telework establish a minimum
threshold of participation—reser-
ving the term to only those who
spend at least one complete work-
day a week, or 20% of a standard
five-day workweek, away from
the main office [17]—degree of
virtuality seems to be an important
way of describing the teleworker.
Degree of virtuality is especially
important in light of findings sug-
gesting that a balance in time
spent teleworking may be most
desirable, as some studies have
found better productivity with a
moderate amount of time spent
telecommuting [4], [15].
Since degree of virtuality is an im-
portant way of characterizing the
teleworker, it may also be related
to various identifications as well as
use of communication technolo-
gies. For example, the individual
who teleworks all or most of the
time may lack some of the needed
contact with the organization that
serves to reinforce organizational
identification. Spending some time
in the office may be necessary “to
ensure visibility and continued
identification with the corporate
culture and objectives” [15, p.
347]. In the absence of the orga-
nizational contact or face-to-face
interaction with one’s work team or
departmental unit, identification
with those targets may decline.
As for communication technology
usage, one might imagine that the
teleworker who spends most or all
of the workweek away from the
main office will have to rely more
on those technologies than will
the teleworker who more regularly
goes into the main office. Although
Wiesenfeld et al.’s [20] study did
look at the moderating effect of
virtual status on the communi-
cation–identification link, we are
otherwise unaware of any research
exploring these sorts of relation-
ships. Furthermore, if balancing
time spent teleworking with time
spent in a main office is important,
teleworker virtuality may relate to
other variables in a nonlinear way
just as it does with productivity.
Treating virtuality as an indepen-
dent variable influencing other
outcomes, we ask the following
set of research questions:
RQ3a: How does degree of virtu-
ality affect identification
with personal interests,
work team/department,
organization, and occu-
pation?
RQ3b: How does degree of vir-
tuality affect communi-
cation technology use?
Demographic Differences Among
Teleworkers The experience of
telepresence appears to vary by in-
dividual [19]; thus, one might also
expect that key characteristics of
teleworkers would also be related
to the other variables suggested
by the telepresence framework as
applied to telework. One of the de-
mographics that past telework re-
search has identified as important
and in need of additional research
is job type [15], or job character-
istics [4]. Several scholars have
pointed to differences between
professional, clerical, sales, and
other types of teleworking jobs,
based largely on the importance of
visibility and satisfaction [13], [15],
[26]. Additionally, occupational
differences related to the type of
industry in which one is working
may also be important; however,
there is little research to connect
these to the variables of interest
in this study. Furthermore, some
of these job types may be more
populated by either men or women
[13]. Although the topic of tele-
workers’ biological sex has not
been widely examined, it appears
that teleworkers are only slightly
more likely to be men than women
[26]. Additionally, telework is done
by managers, as well as nonman-
agers [14], making this another
key distinction not adequately
explored in previous research.
One other demographic not widely
examined in this literature is level
of teleworkers’ tenure/experience.
We know that communication tech-
nology use is strongly predicted
by experience [49], and we know
that identification with various
workplace targets is related to
tenure in one’s group, organiza-
tion, or occupation [23], [47], [52].
Furthermore, given the nature of
our interests in this paper, the
246 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
length of time spent teleworking
may be an important predictor of
outcomes such as communication
technology use and various identi-
fications. In one study, teleworkers
had longer organizational tenure
than their office worker counter-
parts, but no effort was made to
tie that conclusion to the vari-
ables of interest here [4]. Because
past research has not adequately
explored tenure or these other
important demographic issues as
predictors, we ask the following
set of questions related to the
variables of interest in this paper:
RQ4a: How do various tele-
worker demographics
(experience/tenure as
well as job character-
istics, industry, and sex)
affect identification with
one’s personal interests,
work team/department,
organization, and occu-
pation?
RQ4b: How do various tele-
worker demographics
(experience/tenure as
well as job characteris-
tics, industry, and sex)
affect their use of com-
munication technolo-
gies?
RQ4c: How do various tele-
worker demographics
(experience/tenure as
well as job character-
istics, industry, and sex)
affect teleworker virtual-
ity?
METHOD
Sample and Procedure Data for
this study was collected in Spring
of 1998 in a metropolitan area
in the southwest United States.
Thirty-six students in an upper
division undergraduate commu-
nication technology course at a
large university assisted with the
administration of the pen and
paper questionnaire used for this
study. Each student was asked
to deliver a questionnaire to three
different organizational employ-
ees who telework (i.e., work at
least some portion of their work
week away from their employing
organization’s main office). Stu-
dents were instructed to provide
surveys only to organizationally
employed individuals who worked
at least some portion of the week
away from their main office. They
were also told that self-employed
workers and homemakers were not
eligible for this study. To ensure
that an appropriate organizational
sample was being used, students
were also asked not to complete
the surveys themselves. Students
were given class credit for locat-
ing respondents and returning
the completed surveys to the re-
searchers in an envelope sealed
by the participant (in two cases,
surveys were faxed back instead).
A total of 108 surveys were given to
students and 86 usable question-
naires were returned for an 80%
response rate.
The respondents for this sam-
ple came from a diverse array
of industries, representing con-
struction/manufacturing/energy
, wholesale/retail trades
, information ,
financial/real estate ,
health/legal professions ,
entertainment/accommodations
, government , per-
sonnel services , and other
. This corresponds with the
industries using telecommuting as
reported in one survey (in order):
business/social/miscellaneous ser-
vices, health/education/govern-
ment, telecommunications/utilities,
construction/manufacturing, re-
tailing/wholesaling, and finance/
insurance/real estate (and other)
[53]. It is also consistent with two
of three types of organizations
studied by Fritz, Narasimhan,
and Rhee [4]: high-tech sales and
service as well as government. Be-
cause several of the demographic
characteristics are tested as part
of this study, a fuller description
of the sample is provided in the
results section and in the accom-
panying tables.
The cover page of the survey ex-
plained the purpose of the study.
For later verification of the sample,
participants were asked to indicate
their name and phone number
on the cover page. Subjects were
informed that the researchers were
collecting names exclusively for
survey verification and that their
identity would otherwise remain
confidential. To help ensure the
validity of the sample, the authors
randomly selected one survey from
each student. The researchers
contacted each participant by tele-
phone and asked whether they had
completed the survey. The identity
of all participants in the verifica-
tion sample was corroborated in
the telephone calls.
Measurement
Communication Technology Use:
Eighteen different communication
technologies were assessed as
part of this research (see Table I).
Communication technology was
broadly considered as any appara-
tus (device, tool, or machine) used
to help accomplish the exchange
of messages; thus, a wide array
of technologies are examined. A
broad definition for technology
is useful here because it allows
us to consider several different
types of technology that may be
of relevance to teleworkers. These
included traditional (e.g., basic
land-line phone) and “new” me-
dia (e.g., desktop videoconferenc-
ing) as well as individual (e.g.,
fax) and group (e.g., groupware)
technologies. Additionally, some
technologies represent the pro-
gram or interface used to compose
messages (e.g., wordprocessing
or voice recognition); others are
the technology used to actually
send and/or receive messages
(e.g., electronic mail); and still
others are more of the delivery
mechanism (e.g., postal service or
personal couriers). Additionally,
the technologies vary on their
interactivity, with some facilitating
synchronous two-way communi-
cation (e.g., speaker phone), oth-
ers providing asynchronous two-
way communication (e.g., voice
mail), and still others providing
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 247
more of a one-way link to people
(e.g., pagers) or information (e.g.,
WWW). For each of the 18 tech-
nologies, single items assessed
frequency of usage (six-point scale
ranging from never to very regu-
larly) and degree of importance to
the user (five-point scale ranging
from very unimportant to very
important). Respondents also in-
dicated (yes/no) if they used the
technology for several message
types: task, social relations, inno-
vations/suggestions, questions in
general, and grapevine information
(see Table II). Finally, respondents
indicated (yes/no) whether they
used the technology to interact
with several different communi-
cators: supervisor, coworkers, top
organizational management, and
external customers (Table II).
To reduce the number of technolo-
gies for some of the analyses, we
ran a principal components factor
analysis with varimax rotation
on the usage frequency of each
technology. This data-reduction
technique produced seven fac-
tors that each accounted for a
significant amount of variance;
however, the final two factors were
composed of only a single tech-
nology (pagers/beepers and per-
sonal couriers) and were sub-
sequently dropped from further
analysis. The electronic meeting
technology factor (eigenvalue
) included computer confer-
encing ( ), groupware ( ),
meeting room videoconferencing
TABLE I
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USAGE FREQUENCY AND VITAL IMPORTANCE TO TELEWORK
248 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
( ), desktop videoconferencing
(), and voice recognition ( ).
These five items resulted in a
somewhat reliable scale ( ),
with intercorrelations ranging from
to . This factor emphasizes
personal-computer-based applica-
tions that are generally of a more
sophisticated nature and often
less common as a result (indeed,
the rarity of these applications
may be why voice recognition only
loaded on this factor even though
it is not a conferencing technology
per se). The basic desktop factor
(eigenvalue ) included word-
processing ( ), email ( ), and
World Wide Web ( ). Combined,
the reliability of these three items
as a scale was , and the corre-
lations among the three variables
ranged from to . These
three technologies are also based
on the personal computer but
represent relatively common ap-
plications for most organizational
workers. The third factor, ad-
vanced phone (eigenvalue ),
included wireless/cellular phones
(), speakerphones ( ), and
audioconferencing ( ). Although
the reliability for these three items
is only , the items are moder-
ately correlated with one another
(to ). These three tech-
nologies represent special uses
of the phone technology that are
generally not tied to one’s personal
computer. The delivery services
factor (eigenvalue ) included
the postal service ( ), overnight
delivery services ( ), and fax
(). The intercorrelations among
these three items ranged from
to , and the reliability for the
three-item scale was . Again,
these technologies are generally
not tied to one’s personal computer
TABLE II
SUM OF RESPONDENTS USING VARIOUS COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES FOR
SPECIFIC COMMUNICATION CONTENT AREAS AND INTERACTION PARTNERS
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 249
but rather represent a means of
delivering printed documents to
an alternate destination. Fifth, the
basic phone technologies factor
(eigenvalue ) included ba-
sic telephone ( ) and voicemail
(). Although the reliability of
these two items as a scale is low
(alpha ), they are moderately
correlated with one another (
). These two uses of phone
technology can be considered more
common than the special uses as-
sociated with the advanced phone
factor. Although scale reliabilities
are somewhat lower than desired,
the factors generally make sense
conceptually and achieve the data
reduction necessary for subse-
quent statistical analysis.
Identification: Personal, work
team/departmental, organizational,
and occupational identification
were measured with a modification
of the Organizational Identification
Questionnaire (OIQ) [54], using
four parallel items for each target.
Previous studies reported reliabil-
ities ranging from to for
parallel targets based on this scale
[47], [49]. Two other studies have
reported reliabilities ranging from
to and to for the
same four scale items used in the
current research on similar targets
of identification [50], [55] The four
items were “I am willing to put in
a great deal of effort beyond what
is normally expected to help my
(work team/department, employ-
ing organization, occupation, or
personal interest) be successful,” “I
feel very little loyalty to my (target)”
(reverse coded), “I really care about
the fate of my (target),” and “I
try to make relevant decisions by
considering the consequences of
my actions to my (target).” In the
current research, reliabilities for
the scales were as follows: work
team/department ( ), organi-
zation ( ), personal ( ), and
occupation ( ).
Degree of Virtuality: Degree of
virtuality was measured with a
single question assessing the per-
centage of the typical workweek
spent teleworking. Respondents
self-reported the actual percentage
of the week that they worked away
from the organization’s main office.
Because the literature reviewed
also suggested that virtuality may
be related in a nonlinear way
to identification and communi-
cation technology usage, we di-
vided the sample as closely as
possible into equal thirds and
conducted additional analyses to
explore differences between low
(1–20%), moderate (21–50%) and
high (51–100%) virtuality telework-
ers based on the percentages each
participant reported. Although
these categories differ somewhat
from previous research in which
86% of the sample spent 40% or
less of their week teleworking [4],
we believe this division allows for
a more diverse range in virtuality
that is easily interpreted (i.e., one
day or less, more than one day
but no more than one-half week,
or more than half of one’s work
week).
Demographics: Respondents
were asked to indicate length of
time employed by current organ-
ization, length of membership on
current work team or in current
department, length of time in cur-
rent occupation, current age, and
length of time teleworking. Ad-
ditionally, participants indicated
whether they were supervisors,
their job position (administrative,
sales, other professional, or other),
the type of organization (i.e., in-
dustry) for which they worked
(open-ended), and their sex (male
or female). The researchers coded
each teleworker into one of nine
categories of industry type based
on standard industry classifica-
tions [56]. Independent coding
resulted in a 77% agreement rate
among the coders, and all dis-
agreements were mutually resolved.
Because some industry categories
contained only a handful of tele-
workers, several categories were
combined—resulting in five types:
construction/manufacturing,
wholesale/retail trades, informa-
tion, financial, and other.
Analysis The research questions
were answered with a variety of
statistical techniques suited to the
data. Means and sums for all 18
communication technologies were
used to provide answers to RQ 1.
RQ 2 separately regressed each
of the four identification scores
on the five communication tech-
nology usage frequency factors,
examining both overall and
individual beta weights. RQs 3a
and 3b were also answered with
regressions, where the four iden-
tification scores and the five com-
munication technology usage fre-
quency factors, respectively, were
separately regressed on teleworker
virtuality. Again, both overall
and individual beta weights were
considered. Additionally, ANOVAs
and post-hoc follow-up tests were
used to look for nonlinear relations
with the three categories of virtu-
ality. RQs 4a–4c were answered
with several regressions, ANOVAs,
and post-hoc tests to explore the
relationship between various de-
mographic variables and multiple
identifications, communication
technology usage, and teleworker
virtuality. Again, both overall
and individual beta weights were
considered on all regressions.
An acceptance level of
was established for all significance
tests, which provides an appropri-
ate balance given the exploratory
nature of the research and the
relatively large number of tests
conducted. Table III provides a
correlation table that includes the
primary interval-based measures
in the study.
RESULTS
Research Question 1: Communi-
cation Technology Use
How do teleworkers use various
communication technologies? As
one might expect, differences exist
in usage frequency, importance to
teleworking, use for various con-
tent purposes, and use with vari-
ous interaction partners. Table II
illustrates that the basic phone is
clearly the most frequently used of
250 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
these technologies, with voicemail
a distant second. At the other
end of usage, technologies such
as computer conferencing, meet-
ing room videoconferencing, voice
recognition, and desktop videocon-
ferencing are rarely, if ever, used.
The findings for importance of
each technology to make telework
possible follow a similar pattern
(see Table II). Again, basic phone,
voicemail, fax, wordprocessors,
and email are seen as the five most
vitally important communication
technologies to enable telework,
whereas computer conferencing,
meeting room videoconferencing,
voice recognition, and desktop
videoconferencing are seen as the
least important. The similarity in
the usage frequency and impor-
tance scores lead us to only use the
frequency scores in subsequent
analyses.
In general, task messages were
the most common for all tech-
nologies. The most utilized tech-
nology for task messages was the
fax, followed closely by basic tele-
phone, voicemail, wordprocessing,
and overnight delivery services.
A different pattern emerges for
social/relational messages, where
participant’s top five technologies
are basic telephone, email, voice-
mail, postal service, and cellu-
lar/wireless phones. For several
technologies (e.g., computer con-
ferencing, groupware, audiocon-
ferencing, meeting room video-
conferencing, desktop videocon-
ferencing, and voice recognition),
social/relational messages were
among the least common of all
message types. For innovations/
suggestions, email and telephone
are clearly the most used. Ques-
tion asking by teleworkers is more
likely to involve use of basic tele-
phones, email, voicemail, fax, and
World Wide Web than other tech-
nologies. The basic telephone and
email are also most used for shar-
ing grapevine information (see
Table II).
Interaction with various commu-
nication partners is also reported
in Table II. More than half of
the respondents used the basic
telephone, voicemail, fax, email,
wordprocessing, cellular phones,
and the postal service in their
interactions with a supervisor. An
even smaller list of communication
technologies are used to inter-
act with top management. How-
ever, teleworkers’ interactions with
TABLE III
PEARSON CORRELATIONS FOR ALL CONTINUOUS VARIABLES
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 251
coworkers were facilitated with
the basic telephone, email, fax,
wordprocessors, wireless/cellular
phones, speakerphones, postal
service, World Wide Web, pagers/
beepers, and overnight delivery
services for over half those sur-
veyed. Similarly, a rather varied
list of technologies were used by at
least half the teleworkers to inter-
act with external customers; how-
ever, postal service and personal
couriers are relatively stronger
with this audience than the more
internal audiences.
Research Question 2: Multiple
Identifications
How does teleworkers’ usage
of communication technologies
affect identification with personal
interests, work team/department,
organization, and occupation? In
general, there is little impact here
except for the use of advanced
phone technologies on both orga-
nizational and occupational iden-
tifications. Regressions of each
identification score on the five
communication technology usage
factors reveals no overall effect for
personal interests identification,
and no significant
betas for any individual predic-
tors. Similarly, there is no overall
effect for work team/department
identification, and no
significant betas for any individual
predictors. Although the commu-
nication technology usage factors
as a set do not significantly explain
organizational identification ei-
ther, the advanced phone
use factor is a significant and
positive predictor, beta
Similarly, the set of
communication technology usage
factors do not significantly predict
occupational identification,
; however, the advanced phone
use factor is a significant and
positive predictor, beta
Research Question 3: Teleworker
Virtuality
How does degree of virtuality
affect identification with personal
interests, work team/department,
organization, and occupation? It
appears to influence it in a non-
linear way. Linear regressions
revealed no effect for percentage
of time teleworking on identifi-
cation with personal interests,
identification with
work team/department,
identification with organization,
nor identification with
occupation, However,
dividing the teleworkers into low,
moderate, and high levels of virtu-
ality (based on percentage of week
spent teleworking) and looking
for more than a linear relation-
ship between the variables does
reveal several significant find-
ings (see Table IV). Specifically,
the three levels differ on work
team/department identification,
organiza-
tional identification,
and occupational identi-
fication,
Post hoc Tukey tests and analysis
of the means reveal that with
all three identification targets,
the moderately virtual teleworkers
are more identified than the low-
virtuality teleworkers. The pattern
of means suggests the moderates
are also more identified than the
high-virtuality teleworkers, even if
not significantly so in this sample.
How Does Percentage of Work-
week Spent Telecommuting Affect
Communication Technology Use?
There appears to be no signifi-
cant impact here. Using the low-,
moderate-, and high-virtuality dis-
tinctions, ANOVAs revealed no
significant differences between the
three levels for any of the commu-
nication technology usage factors.
Similarly, regression analysis re-
vealed that actual percentage of
workweek spent telecommuting
was not a significant predictor
of communication technology use
(ranges from to ).
Research Question 4: Demo-
graphic Differences
How do various teleworker demo-
graphics (experience/tenure as
well as job characteristics, indus-
try, and sex) affect identification
with one’s personal interests,
work team/department, organi-
zation, and occupation? We note
several scattered relationships. As
a set, the tenure measures (time
with organization, work unit, and
occupation, as well as age and
number of years teleworking), do
not significantly predict identifica-
tion with personal interests,
; however, time spent as a tele-
worker is a significant and negative
predictor, beta
The same set of tenure
measures does not significantly
predict identification with one’s
work team/department, ;
however, age emerges as a signif-
icant and positive predictor here,
beta The
set of tenure measures do not quite
account for a significant amount
of variance in organizational iden-
tification, The tenure
measures as a set do, however,
significantly predict identification
with occupation, even
though none of the individual
items is a significant predictor
(see Table V). Among the cate-
gorical demographics, teleworkers
with supervisory responsibilities
identified more with their work
team/department,
organization,
and occupation,
than
teleworkers without such respon-
sibilities. There were no differences
among the four job types for any of
the identification variables. Also,
there were no differences between
the five industry types for any of
the identification variables. Sim-
252 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
ilarly, there were no differences
between the sexes for any of the
four identification measures (see
Table VI).
How do various teleworker de-
mographics (experience/tenure as
well as job characteristics, indus-
try, and sex) affect their use of
communication technologies? In
general, there are again several
scattered findings of importance.
There were no significant relations
between four of the communica-
tion technology factors (electronic
meeting, basic desktop, delivery
services, and basic phone) and the
tenure demographics, although
age is a positive and significant
individual predictor of basic phone
technology usage, beta
However, the
set of tenure measures does ac-
count for a significant amount of
variance in the use of advanced
phone technologies, and
the strongest individual predictor
is organizational tenure, beta
(see Table V).
As for the categorical demograph-
ics, teleworkers with supervisory
responsibilities are more likely
than teleworkers without such re-
sponsibilities to use both advanced
phone communication technolo-
gies, and
basic phone communication tech-
nologies,
As for job type, the only signif-
icant difference among them is
in use of delivery service tech-
nologies, ;
however, none of the pairwise
Tukey’s are significant. Differences
based on industry type emerged for
both delivery services technologies,
and basic
desktop technologies,
; specifically, telework-
ers in the financial industry used
delivery services technologies sig-
nificantly more often than tele-
workers in either wholesale/retail
trades or the information sector,
and teleworkers in the information
sector used basic desktop tech-
nologies significantly more often
than teleworkers in the “other”
category (legal/health professions,
entertainment/accommodations,
government, personnel services,
and miscellaneous). Finally, fe-
male teleworkers reported greater
usage of basic desktop communi-
cation technologies,
and basic phone commu-
nication technologies,
than did males (see
Table VI).
How do various teleworker de-
mographics (experience/tenure as
well as job characteristics, indus-
try, and sex) affect teleworker vir-
tuality? Basically, there appears to
be no relationship between these
sets of variables. The set of tenure
measures explained an insignifi-
cant amount of the variance in this
outcome (see Table V). Similarly,
there were no differences for time
spent teleworking between su-
pervisors–nonsupervisors, various
job types, industry, or sex (see
Table VI).
DISCUSSION
This research was driven by two
goals: to describe communication
technology use by teleworkers
and to explore the relationships
between several variables sug-
gested by applying the construct
of telepresence to telework (in-
cluding multiple identifications,
use of communication technolo-
gies, virtuality of teleworkers, and
teleworker demographics). Based
on the results from our survey
of 86 organizationally-employed
teleworkers, we next draw some
conclusions about these findings,
offer several practical implications
suggested by them, and explore
directions for further research in
this area.
TABLE IV
IDENTIFICATION SCORES AMONG LOW-, MODERATE-, AND HIGH-VIRTUALITY TELEWORKERS (BASED ON TIME SPENT TELECOMMUTING)
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 253
TABLE V
EXPERIENCE/TENURE PREDICTORS OF IDENTIFICATIONS,COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE,AND TELEWORKER VIRTUALITY
TABLE VI
DIFFERENCES IN IDENTIFICATION,COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE,AND VIRTUALITY BASED ON SUPERVISORY ROLE,JOB TYPE,INDUSTRY,AND SEX
254 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
Conclusions
Describing Communication Tech-
nology Use: Given the ubiquity
of basic phone service and, to a
lesser extent, voicemail in U.S.
organizations, it should not be
surprising that these are the most
frequently used and most vitally
important communication tech-
nologies for today’s teleworker. Of
equal interest is the fact that sev-
eral newer communication tech-
nologies (e.g., computer confer-
encing, meeting room videoconfer-
encing, and desktop videoconfer-
encing) are rarely used, perhaps
in large part because of greater
expense associated with some of
these technologies as well as less
need by individual teleworkers
for these “group” communication
technologies [52]. This finding
serves as an important reminder
to not overlook more traditional
communication technologies (such
as the basic telephone) in our
research on media use in orga-
nizations (virtual or traditional).
Because the new technologies are
more likely to supplement than
substitute for existing media [57],
[58], research must explore the
wide range of communication tech-
nologies available to organizational
members.
Although task communication was
generally the most common con-
tent carried by the communication
media examined here, the findings
also revealed several differences
between the communication tech-
nologies teleworkers use for differ-
ent types of message content and
for interaction with various others.
For example, fax ranked highly
among the technologies used for
task communication but was less
often used for other purposes
(e.g., social/relational). Email is
particularly interesting in that
its use for task purposes rela-
tive to other technologies is less
prominent than its use for innova-
tions/suggestions and its use with
grapevine information. Although
interaction with top management
is fairly minimal and facilitated
through only a handful of com-
munication technologies, the find-
ings suggest that a wide range of
communication technologies are
used to interact with supervisors,
coworkers, and customers. These
findings point to the need to not
only consider different interaction
partners in our research, but also
to account for the wide range of
media options available to tele-
workers for such interactions.
Communication Technology and
Identifications: Although the ba-
sic telephone and voicemail (which
is frequently used as little more
than a basic answering machine
by most users [59]) are the most
frequently used and vitally impor-
tant to teleworkers, it is actually
the use of more advanced phone
technologies (e.g., audioconfer-
encing, cellular/wireless phones,
and speakerphones) that is most
predictive of outcomes such as
organizational and occupational
identification. It is possible that
the additional individual effort to
participate in an audioconference
or the feeling of importance that
results from using one’s cellu-
lar/wireless phone may lead to
identification with targets such
as one’s organization and occu-
pation. However, an even more
likely explanation for this finding
is that the highly identified tele-
workers are more often provided
with additional technologies such
as wireless phones and speaker-
phones or are more often involved
in important audioconferencing
calls. The findings that teleworkers
who are supervisors are both more
identified with most targets and
use advanced phone technologies
more often than teleworkers who
are nonsupervisors, coupled with
the finding that organizational
tenure is predictive of greater ad-
vanced phone technology usage,
would seem to support such an
interpretation (given that manage-
ment and high-tenure employees
tend to be more identified).
The frequency of use findings sug-
gest that most teleworkers had
access to basic phone, basic desk-
top, and delivery service tech-
nologies (and few may have had
much access to electronic meeting
technologies) and, thus, those
technologies have relatively little
variance in the sample. However,
the advanced phone technologies
were used more so by some and
less so by others, and the greater
use of these systems is related
to increased organizational and
occupational identification (and,
conversely, less use is related
to less identification with these
targets). Although the connection
to occupational identification is
difficult to tease out here (given
the wide range of professions and
occupations in the sample), the
significant findings for organiza-
tional identification, but not for
work team or personal identifi-
cation, may be attributed to the
perception that the organization
makes the decisions about who
gets to be in audioconferences and
who receives wireless phones and
speakerphones.
Virtuality and its Outcomes: Per-
haps the most interesting finding
in this research is what seems
to be a nonlinear relationship
between teleworker virtuality and
identification with work team, or-
ganization, and occupation. Al-
though linear regressions revealed
no relationship between degree
of participation and identifica-
tion, three-way splits of the data
reveal that those who telework
21–50% of the week are more
identified than those who telework
less often than that. Though not
statistically different, the pattern
of the means also indicates that
the moderately virtual teleworkers
had stronger identification with
these three targets than those
who telework over 50% of the
week. This seems consistent with
both the findings that the most
productive teleworkers were those
with a moderate degree of partici-
pation [15] as well as some of the
other speculation in the literature
reviewed here. It may be that
too little time spent teleworking
does not provide the flexibility or
is indicative of a lack of trust in
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 255
the teleworker, both of which may
lower identification. Conversely,
too much time away from the
office may also lower identification
by not providing the employee
with the necessary exposure to
the organization and its values. A
more moderate level of telework
(approaching half-time) seems to
result in stronger identification
levels with these three key targets.
However, there was no effect for
percentage of week spent telework-
ing on communication technology
use. In one sense, we would have
expected those who are away from
the main office more to use com-
munication technologies more to
stay in touch. However, it may
well be that those who spend a
greater percentage of their week
teleworking have jobs that do not
require any more communication
than is necessary for those who
only telework a small portion of
the time. It seems, then, that
communication technology use
is affected by issues other than
teleworker virtuality.
Teleworker Demographics and
Outcomes: Finally, there were
some demographic aspects of tele-
workers that influenced either
communication technology use or
identification. Among the experi-
ence/tenure predictors, we already
noted that organizational tenure
positively predicts use of advanced
phone technologies by teleworkers.
Additionally, the less time one has
been teleworking, the more likely
he or she is to identify strongly
with personal interests. It may be
that initially, one associates tele-
work with individual freedom, per-
sonal preferences, and doing what
is best for him/her; however, as
one gains experience teleworking,
that strong personal identification
declines. Relatedly, teleworkers’
age was a positive predictor of work
team identification and the set of
tenure/experience measures were
predictive of occupational identifi-
cation. Although it is not clear why
the experience/tenure predictors
were more related to these two
identification targets, the positive
connections seem consistent with
the internalization of work team,
organizational, and occupational
values over time.
Among the job characteristics,
industry, and sex demograph-
ics, we already mentioned that
teleworkers who were supervi-
sors were more identified with
their work team, organization, and
occupation, and used advanced
phone technologies more often
than did teleworkers who were
nonsupervisors. Additionally, fe-
male teleworkers were more likely
than male teleworkers to use basic
desktop (e.g., wordprocessing and
email) and basic phone (e.g., tele-
phone and voicemail) technologies.
This could be a result of female
teleworkers filling more traditional
clerical roles that would demand
greater use of these technologies
[13]. However, the fact that job type
had no effect on either identifica-
tion or communication technology
use, a finding which seems incon-
sistent with speculations about
differences between professional
and other types of telework jobs,
raises some doubt about such an
interpretation. Finally, we note
that the industry in which the
teleworker is employed resulted
in varied usage levels for both
delivery service (used most by
teleworkers in the financial indus-
try) and basic desktop technolo-
gies (used most by teleworkers in
the information sector). Although
these two findings make intuitive
sense, it is perhaps the general
lack of differences based on indus-
try type that is most informative,
suggesting that this demographic
is not what generally shapes either
teleworker virtuality or multiple
identifications.
Implications for Practice The
findings reported here suggest sev-
eral implications for both telework-
ers and organizations considering
or practicing this virtual form of
organizing. First, one of the biggest
issues for teleworkers and their
employers is adequately equipping
a home office with the necessary
tools to conduct one’s work; nat-
urally, this includes consideration
of the communication technologies
needed. The data here provide
what should be useful guidelines
on what teleworkers use and what
they see as most important for con-
ducting their work. Given the un-
necessary expense of making every
possible communication channel
available to the virtual workers,
it may be that certain targeted
communication technologies (as
rank ordered in Table II) will suf-
fice. We note that 10 of the 18
technologies we asked about are
used by at least 84% of the re-
spondents (in order): telephone,
fax, voicemail, wordprocessing,
postal service, overnight/delivery
services, email, WWW, wireless
phones, and speakerphones. In
general, actual usage frequency
and perceived vital importance are
fairly similar, with perhaps the
most notable exception involving
the importance of pagers. Table II
reveals that 12 of the 18 technolo-
gies were rated above the midpoint
of the vital importance scale and
may thus, be especially needed;
however, six other fairly expensive
options were not currently seen as
vitally important. Of course, with
any of these technologies, hav-
ing the appropriate infrastructure
and technical support are essen-
tial, although some of the needed
communication technologies will
require more of these aspects than
will others.
Second, these findings imply that
those involved in the telework ef-
fort need to think beyond just task
communication and interactions
with coworkers and supervisors.
Although a number of communica-
tion technologies can provide task
support, a more limited set are well
suited for innovations, question-
asking, and grapevine information.
For example, wordprocessors, fax,
and overnight delivery services
are all used regularly for task
purposes but are not well suited
for question-asking or grapevine
communication. If Zimmer [3] is
correct that being out of sight, but
256 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
still in touch is key for teleworkers,
that sense of connection may de-
pend as much on making queries
and staying in the informal loop
as it depends on getting the job
done. Similarly, customers may be
an important audience for many
teleworkers—but the technolo-
gies used to interact with them
(e.g., postal service and personal
couriers) are different than those
necessary for internal audiences.
Relatedly, audioconferencing is
used for interactions with top
management more so than with
other audiences. Thus, we believe
it is also important to carefully
consider with whom the teleworker
needs to interact. On the basis
of these content and interaction
partner issues, appropriate com-
munication technologies can be
more readily selected.
Third, the findings here suggest
that moderately virtual workers
are more identified with their team,
organization, and occupation than
are more or less virtual telework-
ers. To the extent that employ-
ers value identification and out-
comes associated with it (e.g.,
reduced turnover, increased sat-
isfaction, etc.), telework programs
may be best established as some-
thing other than all-or-nothing
ventures. As a general guideline,
encouraging work arrangements
that involve two days at home
and three days at the main office
may be ideal for promoting iden-
tification. This can be facilitated
through maintaining individual
work spaces at the main office
or through alternative office ar-
rangements that allow for some
shared work space (e.g., hotelling).
Furthermore, the workers consid-
ering a more virtual arrangement
are well advised not to telework
full time if it is important to them
to maintain the highest possible
levels of attachment to a work-
group, organization, and occupa-
tion (though the data do suggest
that teleworkers, regardless of de-
gree of virtuality, were all relatively
well identified with the targets).
As a fourth implication, the use
of more advanced phone technolo-
gies was associated with higher
organizational and occupational
identifications, as well as ties to
top management. This suggests
that these technologies, perhaps
because of the status that may be
associated with them in many or-
ganizations, should be made more
widely available to teleworkers.
Additionally, it may be important
to involve teleworkers in audiocon-
ferenced meetings more so than is
usually done.
Finally, the findings suggest that
teleworkers with supervisory re-
sponsibilities are more identified
with various targets than are those
teleworkers without such respon-
sibilities. Although it is difficult to
know if either a) those individuals
are supervisors in part because
they are more identified, or b) if
the telework has done anything to
affect this connection, the relation-
ship here does suggest some pos-
sibilities for teleworkers and their
managers to consider. Specifically,
retaining or acquiring supervisory
responsibilities as a teleworker
may lead to positive outcomes
such as increased identification
and should be considered by the
employee. Additionally, telework
managers should not assume that
the more virtual worker will be
unable to supervise; thus, super-
visors should also be considered
candidates for telework.
Limitations and Directions for
Future Research To both qualify
some of the above conclusions and
practical implications as well as to
set the stage for future research,
we mention two key sets of limita-
tions with the current research.
First, the sample is limited in
that our definition of teleworkers
was fairly broad (organization-
ally employed individuals who
worked at least some portion of
the week away from their main
office). Although we took several
precautions to ensure the validity
of using students to distribute
surveys, this method provided us
with a less-than-random sam-
pling of teleworkers who were
limited largely to the surround-
ing metropolitan area and the
industries it supports. A second
limitation of note involves our mea-
surement of several items. Despite
the fact that our list of communi-
cation technologies was fairly ex-
tensive, it was neither exhaustive
nor mutually exclusive, as it did
not account for the convergence
of several technologies/channels
into one device (e.g., pagers that
fax and receive email). Further-
more, all the variables reported
here were based on teleworkers’
self-reports, and many of those
were single-item scales. Although
single-item self-report measures
are commonly used to measure
issues such as communication
frequency and importance as well
as most demographics, the use of
multi-item scales and more objec-
tive measures could strengthen
the research. Additionally, the
reliabilities on the identification
scales and the communication
technology usage factors were
somewhat lower than desired,
which may have attenuated the
findings reported here due to the
increased measurement error.
Beyond addressing these limita-
tions, we briefly mention several
directions for future research in
this area. First, communication
research should move beyond ex-
aminations of media choice when
multiple media exist, and should
focus on issues such as frequency,
importance, message content, and
interaction partners. The find-
ings here provide a description of
these issues, but future research
should incorporate theoretical ar-
guments into teleworkers’ use and
evaluations of various commu-
nication technologies. Relatedly,
communication research in this
area must consider the old and
new technologies simultaneously.
Our findings here reinforce the
importance of the basic telephone
in organizational communication.
Second, even though the telepres-
ence construct suggested to us a
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 257
set of related variables relevant to
telework, we did not really explore
telepresence itself in this context.
Future research might examine
the degree to which teleworkers
attain a sense of telepresence
via various communication tech-
nologies. However, it may be that
what creates telepresence in other
environments will be qualitatively
different or less relevant in the vir-
tual form we call telework. These
differences may serve to help us
better understand the telework
movement and expand the work
on telepresence itself.
Third, research must explore is-
sues of causality related to tele-
work, communication technology
use, virtuality, and identification.
Although we have been consistent
with other research in treating
identification as an outcome of
communication technology use
and other aspects of teleworking, it
may well be that those with strong
identification are then chosen to
telework for certain percentages of
the week and then use commu-
nication technologies as needed.
Causal modeling, qualitative en-
deavors, and more longitudinal
research designs are needed to
address this issue, which has
important theoretical and prac-
tical implications for selecting and
retaining teleworkers.
Fourth, future research can ex-
pand on this study to look at
other key variables and related
samples. For example, expanded
research on multiple identifica-
tions (e.g., family) and variables
related to identification (turnover
and issues of unobtrusive control)
deserve attention. This general
interest in the relationship be-
tween communication technology
use and identification must be
extended beyond the realm of just
teleworkers. The vast majority of
communication technology users
are not teleworkers, but issues of
identification are also of extreme
importance to them. Furthermore,
other forms of virtual work beyond
teleworking should be examined.
Fifth, a stronger organizational un-
derstanding of telework, commu-
nication, and identification could
be achieved if more organizational-
level variables were explored. For
example, the organizational cul-
ture and the formality of the tele-
work program may have much
to do with the issues examined
here. Relatedly, socialization into
an organizational culture is an
especially important issue for tele-
workers who may not have the
same frequency of face-to-face
contact with other aspects of the
organizational culture. Exploring
whether effective ongoing social-
ization is possible while one is
teleworking seems an important
endeavor. Indeed, if identification
is an outcome of effective social-
ization efforts, then the role of
socialization becomes especially
important for these workers.
In an era of decreasing loyalties,
increasing communication tech-
nology use, and changing organi-
zational forms, understanding how
these trends relate is imperative.
This connection is relevant in
a wide variety of organizational
contexts but is especially salient
to the more virtual forms of work
represented by such practices as
teleworking. It is our hope that this
initial attempt to explore these
issues can provide an important
source of information in this on-
going effort.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Fulk and G. DeSanctis, “Electronic communication and changing
organizational forms,” Organiz. Sci., vol. 6, pp. 337–349, 1995.
[2] B. Rollier and Y. I. Liou, “The mobile workforce: Strategic opportunity,
competitive necessity,” in The Virtual Workplace, M. Igbaria and M. Tan,
Eds. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 1998, pp. 319–337.
[3] D. A. Zimmer, “Telecommuting,” in Handbook of Electronic Messaging,
N. A. Cox, Ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 1998, pp. 461–500.
[4] M. B. W. Fritz, S. Narasimhan, and H. Rhee, “Communication and
coordination in the virtual office,” J. Manag. Inform. Syst., vol. 14, pp.
7–28, 1998.
[5] F. Li, “Team-telework adn the new geographical flexibility for information
workers,” in The Virtual Workplace, M. Igbaria and M. Tan, Eds.
Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 1998.
[6] J. E. Van Aken, L. Hop, and G. J. J. Post, “The virtual organization: A
special mode of strong interorganizational cooperation,” in Managing
Strategically in an Interconnected World, M. A. Hitt, J. E. Ricari Costa,
and D. Nixon, Eds. New York: Wiley, 1998, pp. 301–320.
258 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
[7] R. D. Westfall, “The microeconomics of remote work,” in The Virtual
Organization, M. Igbaria and M. Tan, Eds. Hershey, PA: Idea Group,
1998, pp. 256–287.
[8] C. Kleiman, “Telecommuting balances life,” in Austin American-Statesman,
Austin TX, 1998, p. D2.
[9] P. Roberts, “The wired worker,” Exec., vol. 5, pp. 1–5, 1998.
[10] PS Enterprises, “On telecommuting: A PS Enterprises research paper,
vol. 1999, PS Enterprises, 1995.
[11] R. L. Rieseberg, “Home learning, technology, and tomorrow’s workplace,”
Technos, vol. 4, pp. 12–17, 1995.
[12] G. E. Gordon, “Doing the office work without the office,” vol. 1999, Gil
Gordon, 1997.
[13] L. Bailyn, “Toward the perfect workplace,” Commun. ACM, vol. 32, pp.
460–471, 1989.
[14] S. Caudron, “Working at home pays off,” Personnel J., vol. 71, pp.
40–49, 1992.
[15] D. W. McCloskey and M. Igbaria, “A review of the empirical research
on telecommuting and directions for future research,” in The Virtual
Workplace, M. Ibgaria and M. Tan, Eds. Hershey, PA: Idea Group,
1998, pp. 338–358.
[16] Y. P. Gupta, J. Karimi, and T. M. Somers, “Telecommuting: Problems
associated with communications technologies and their capabilities,”
IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 42, pp. 305–318, 1995.
[17] L. Duxbury, C. Higgins, and D. Neufeld, “Telework and the balance
between work and family: Is telework part of the problem or part of
the solution?,” in The Virtual Workplace, M. Igbaria and M. Tan, Eds.
Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 1998, pp. 218–255.
[18] M. Lombard and T. Ditton, “At the heart of it all: The concept of
presence,” Electron. J. Comput. Mediated Commun., vol. 3, 1997.
[19] J. Steuer, “Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepres-
ence,” J. Commun., vol. 42, pp. 73–93, 1992.
[20] B. M. Wiesenfeld, S. Raghuram, and R. Garud, “Communication
patterns as determinants of organizational identification in a vir-
tual organization,” J. Comput. Mediated Commun., 1998. Available
at <http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue4/wiesenfeld.html>.
[21] R. S. Fish, R. E. Kraut, R. W. Root, and R. E. Rice, “Video as a technology
for informal communication,” Commun. ACM, vol. 36, pp. 48–61, 1993.
[22] Y. P. Gupta, J. Karimi, and T. M. Somers, “Telecommuting: Problems
associated with communication technologies and their capabilities,”
IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 42, pp. 305–316, 1995.
[23] C. R. Scott and S. C. Rockwell, “The effect of communication, writing,
and technology apprehension on likelihood to use new communication
technologies,” Commun. Educ., vol. 46, pp. 44–62, 1997.
[24] D. R. Siebold, C. M. Bauch, S. J. Grant, K. T. Nguyen, M. Saeki,
K. L. Schnarr, and K. A. Solowczuk, “Communication/information
technologies and university education: A survey of alumni about
workplace technologies,” ACA Bull., vol. 81, pp. 19–31, 1992.
[25] W. R. Pape, “Hire power,” Inc. Technol., vol. 4, 1996.
[26] M. Van Sell and S. M. Jacobs, “Telecommuting and quality of life: A
review of literature and a model for research,” Telematics Inform., vol.
11, pp. 81–95, 1994.
[27] F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user
acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quart., vol. 13, pp. 319–340,
1989.
[28] R. V. Farace, P. R. Monge, and H. M. Russell, Communicating and
Organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1977.
[29] F. Mael and B. E. Ashforth, “Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test
of the reformulated model of organizational identification,” J. Organiz.
Behav., vol. 13, 1992.
[30] C. Huff, L. Sproull, and S. Kiesler, “Computer communication and or-
ganizational commitment: Tracing the relationship in city government,”
SCOTT AND TIMMERMAN: COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE AND MULTIPLE WORKPLACE IDENTIFICATIONS 259
J. Appl. Social Psychol., vol. 19, pp. 1371–1391, 1989.
[31] F. M. Jablin and K. J. Krone, “Organizational assimilation,” in Hand-
book of Communication Science, C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee, Eds.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1987, pp. 711–746.
[32] G. Cheney, Rhetoric in an Organizational Society: Managing Multiple
Identities. Columbia, SC: Univ. South Carolina Press, 1991.
[33] G. Cheney and P. Tompkins, “Coming to terms with organizational
identification and commitment,” Central States Speech J., vol. 38, pp.
1–15, 1987.
[34] P. K. Tompkins and G. Cheney, “Account analysis of organizations: De-
cision making and identification,” in Communication and Organizations:
An Interpretive Approach, L. L. Putnam and M. E. Pacanowsky, Eds.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983, pp. 123–146.
[35] , “Communication and unobtrusive control in contemporary orga-
nizations,” in Organizational Communication: Traditional Themes and
New Directions, R. D. McPhee and P. K. Tompkins, Eds. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage, 1985, pp. 179–210.
[36] M. Lea and R. Spears, “Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation
and group decision-making,” Int. J. Man-Machine Studies, vol. 34, pp.
283–301, 1991.
[37] R. Spears and M. Lea, “Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power
in computer-mediated communication,” Commun. Res., vol. 21, pp.
427–459, 1994.
[38] R. Spears, M. Lea, and S. Lee, “De-individuation and group polarization
in computer-mediated communication,” British J. Social Psychol., vol.
29, pp. 121–134, 1990.
[39] J. B. Walther, “Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-
mediated collaboration,” Human Commun. Res., vol. 23, pp. 342–369,
1997.
[40] C. R. Scott, S. R. Corman, and G. Cheney, “Development of a structura-
tional model of identification in the organization,” Commun. Theory, vol.
8, pp. 298–336, 1998.
[41] H. Tajfel and J. C. Turner, “The social identity theory of intergroup
behavior,” in Psychology of Intergroup Relations, S. Worchel and W. G.
Austin, Eds. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall, 1986, pp. 7–24.
[42] C. Barnard, The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Univ. Press, 1968.
[43] D. T. Hall, B. Schneider, and H. T. Nygren, “Personal factors in
organizational identification,” Admin. Sci. Quart., vol. 15, pp. 176–190,
1970.
[44] J. G. Mar. and H. A. Simon, Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
[45] T. J. Rotondi, “Organizational identification: Issues and implications,”
Organiz. Behavior and Human Perform., vol. 13, pp. 95–109, 1975.
[46] H. A. Simon, Administrative Behavior, 3rd ed. New York: Free Press,
1976.
[47] J. R. Barker and P. K. Tompkins, “Identification in the self-managing
organization: Characteristics of target and tenure,” Human Communica-
tion Research, vol. 21, 1994.
[48] T. C. Russo, “Organizational and professional identification: A case of
newspaper journalists,” Manag. Commun. Quart., vol. 12, pp. 72–111,
1998.
[49] C. R. Scott, “Identification with multiple targets in a geographically
dispersed organization,” Manag. Commun. Quart., vol. 10, pp. 491–522,
1997.
[50] C. R. Scott, S. L. Connaughton, H. Diaz-Saenz, K. Maguire, R. Ramirez,
B. Richardson, S. P. Shaw, and D. Morgan, “The impacts of com-
munication and multiple identifications on intent to leave: A multi-
methodoligical exploration,” Manag. Commun. Quart., vol. 12, pp.
400–435, 1999.
[51] K. Christensen, “Managing invisible employees: How to meet the
telecommuting challenge,” Employee Relations Today, vol. 19, pp.
260 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 42, NO. 4, DECEMBER 1999
133–143, 1992.
[52] C. R. Scott, “Communication technology and group communication,”
in Group Communication Handbook, L. R. Frey, M. S. Poole, and D. S.
Gouran, Eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999, pp. 432–472.
[53] D. T. Prystash, “Corporate attitudes and commitments to telecommut-
ing,” IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun., vol. 38, pp. 95–99, 1995.
[54] G. Cheney, Identification as Process and Product: A Field Study. West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue Univ., 1982.
[55] C. R. Scott and J. Fontenot, “Multiple identifications during team
meetings: A comparison of conventional and computer-mediated inter-
actions,” Commun. Reps., in press.
[56] J. E. Cremeans, North American Industry Classification System. Wash-
ington, DC: Bernan, 1997.
[57] G. P. Huber, “A theory of the effects of advanced information tech-
nologies on organizational design, intelligence and decision making,” in
Organizations and Communication Technology, J. Fulk and C. Steinfield,
Eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990, pp. 237–274.
[58] J. Palme, Electronic Mail. Boston, MA: Artech House, 1995.
[59] L. K. Trevino and J. Webster, “Flow in computer-mediated communica-
tion,” Commun. Res., vol. 19, pp. 539–573, 1992.
Craig R. Scott is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication
Studies at The University of Texas at Austin. His research related to communication
technologies has been published in such journals as Communication Education,
Small Group Research, Western Journal of Communication, Communication Quarterly,
Communication Reports, Information Resource Management Journal, and The Handbook
of Group Communication Theory and Research. Scott also teaches graduate and
undergraduate courses on new communication technologies in organizations.
C. Erik Timmerman is a Doctoral Candidate studying organizational communication
and new media in the Department of Communication Studies at The University of
Texas at Austin. He has been published in Communication Quarterly and Business
Communication Quarterly.
... In the late 1990s, there were calls for more technical communication-focused research into computer-supported collaboration using tools such as email and computer-mediated conferencing [9]. This same period saw increasing interest among technical and professional communication scholars in the effects of telework [10], [11], [12]. These studies pointed out some of the communication challenges related to remote work. ...
... Telework is an alternative work arrangement in which workers employ information and communication technologies (ICTs) to engage in work from locations not provided by employers [10], [11], [12], [26]. Because of the demands associated with virtual communication environments, such as learning new ways to build social networks [10], [14] and developing enhanced rhetorical skills [13], telework represents a situation in one's environment that is potentially distress-inducing [28]. ...
Article
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the popularity of teleworking has risen. Telework seems poised to remain popular even after the pandemic fades away. As a result, it is important to understand the humanistic effects of telework such as distress, coping responses, and related effects. Literature review: Uncertainties related to telework can lead to distress. When this occurs, teleworkers may employ a variety of coping responses, which vary across several important dimensions. These coping responses vary in the extent to which they affect telework outcomes. Research questions: 1. What strategies do teleworkers use for dealing with telework distress? 2. How are various coping strategies related to humanistic telework outcomes? Methodology: Data from a survey of 504 American teleworkers were used to test a theoretical model. Results: Results suggest that teleworkers cope with telework distress through assistance seeking, technology experimentation, venting, and negative and positive emotions. Coping responses had differential effects on telework exhaustion and satisfaction, with negative and positive emotions and venting affecting exhaustion, and assistance seeking, task experimentation, emotions, and venting affecting satisfaction. Distress had a direct effect on exhaustion, but not on satisfaction. Conclusion: The effects of emotion-focused coping on telework satisfaction and exhaustion are notably stronger than those of problem-focused coping responses. Emotion-focused coping responses that are adaptive have beneficial effects, while those that are maladaptive have detrimental effects. Adaptive problem-focused responses have similar effects. The extent of communication focus does not seem to affect the impact of coping responses on outcomes.
... Much of the prior research on what was originally called telework was written around people who chose that way of working. They teleworked only part of the week (Scott & Timmerman, 1999), had adequate child care, could fulfill their interaction needs through travel and meeting with friends, and had the technology resources provided by their organizations to help them do their work (Stephens et al., 2020). This is not what happened during the pandemic. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
A cosmology event—a severe disruption where people no longer understand the universe to be rational—is the best way to describe the COVID-19 Pandemic. The struggles of being quarantined during a pandemic helped me create new structures to cope. Going outdoors became a highly treasured break, and since my office had no doors, I created a façade that helped me feel more privacy as I fashioned an acceptable background for my new way of meeting: Zoom. I turned my illusion of control into reality by focusing on research and teaching and beginning five new research studies. Yet I also overworked incessantly and dealt with family health issues that had me question whether I could be a good mother. I existed in a zone of emergent complexity; the space between the edge of chaos and the edge of stability, a sweet spot where innovation occurs. Living in this zone forced me to bounce back and forth between these edges of chaos and stability, sometimes slipping, even if briefly, into full chaos. I’m exhausted from this constant motion, but I also know I must keep moving forward.
... Firstly, working from home often includes separating team members entirely from the rest of the team, which only increases the negative effects distribution can have on cooperation. Scott and Timmerman (1999) state that removing a team member from the others decreases the project awareness of that employee. Both (Marshall et al. 2007) and (Mann et al. 2000) argue that the lack of support, social interactions and feeling of group belonging increase workplace isolation and the resulting problems. ...
Conference Paper
With the increasing relevance of decentralisation for the software development process, being aware of the possible challenges and corresponding solutions has become more relevant than ever. The scientific body of knowledge is currently containing many publications about specific aspects of decentralisation, but is lacking in collections that cover more than one area. In this work, the challenges of different forms of decentralisation are examined by means of a literature review. Subsequently, the findings are evaluated and summarised into guidelines that can be applied by project managers and development teams to increase the success of decentralisation of the software development process.
... While it is possible that technology-mediated interactions-for instance, via SNS or video calls-can partially compensate for the lack of face-to-face encounters, even the most advanced technology-mediated communications may not equal the information richness and social presence of face-to-face interactions (Yoo and Alavi, 2001;Waizenegger et al., 2020). The literature on technology-mediated communication has documented that electronic communication generally features lower levels of information richness and social presence than does face-to-face communication (Andres, 2002;Scott and Timmerman, 1999). Information richness refers to the extent to which a communication medium bridges different frames of reference, carries multiple cues, reduces equivocation and minimises ambiguity (Daft et al., 1987). ...
Article
Full-text available
Prior research has often portrayed information technology (IT) as a stressor. In this paper, we propose and demonstrate that IT can also be an effective means of coping with life stressors, including those induced by pandemics such as COVID-19. We thus deviate from the common IT-as-a-stressor perspective and adopt an IT-as-a-coping-mechanism viewpoint. To this end, we apply the stressor-detachment model from organisational psychology to the use of social network sites (SNSs) in coping with stressors wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine psychological well-being as our dependent variable and introduce psychological detachment through SNS use as a mediator and moderator of the associations between psychological well-being and two COVID-19 stressors: work–family conflict and perceived isolation. We used structural equation modelling and tested this model with survey data collected from 398 professionals who were in lockdown and working from home during the pandemic. The results indicated that psychological detachment through SNS uses increased psychological well-being and that heightened work–family conflict motivated this detachment strategy. In contrast, consistent with helplessness and motivation–opportunity theories, perceived isolation as a stressor did not influence psychological detachment through SNS use. While perceived isolation directly reduced individual well-being, the effect of work–family conflict on well-being was contingent upon users' levels of psychological detachment through SNS use. These findings suggest that while psychological detachment through SNS use is an effective means of improving one's well-being, it can be positively or negatively affected by stressors. Our study contributes to research on technology-mediated strategies for coping with stress and the psychosocial implications of global pandemics.
... According to social identity theory, people who work from home reduce their selfcategorization as members of the organization due to the physical distance and the resulting lower visibility of their organizational belonging . Employees who frequently work from home find it more difficult to develop a sense of identification and lack important contact with the company that serves to strengthen organizational identification (Bartel et al., 2012;Scott and Timmerman, 1999). The higher the extent of WFH is, the less the employees are exposed to organizational structures (Thatcher and Zhu, 2006). ...
Article
Full-text available
Although many scholars and practitioners have shown that work from home (WFH) leads to positive organizational outcomes, the COVID-19 outbreak’s consequences suggest important downsides associated with an increased extent of WFH. Utilizing theories of social identity and need to belong, this study aims to investigate the potential dark sides of an increased extent of WFH. In a moderated mediation model, we test how an increased extent of WFH affects feelings of isolation and further influences the employees’ organizational identification. Our study is based on data from an online survey of 382 employees in Germany. Results suggest that a higher extent of WFH during the COVID-19 lockdown leads to more social isolation and less organizational identification. Besides, our results show that task interdependence significantly moderates the correlation between an increased extent of WFH and social isolation. In such manner, our study contributes to the literature on potential counterproductive organizational effects caused by an increased necessity of WFH. Organizations must develop countermeasures to better integrate employees who WFH more intensely into organizational routines to decrease their feelings of social isolation and increase their organizational identification.
Article
Full-text available
Time is central to many debates about hybrid work‐ the impact on speed and productivity, commute times, and synchronisation of work. However, we argue that time is often over‐simplified in extant hybrid work literature and tends to ignore many temporal concepts that capture the inherently complex, multi‐faceted, subtle, and socially embedded nature of time. To address this issue, we conducted studies of five hybrid work teams across two large organisations. The paper contributes to current research on hybrid work by (i) illustrating the various temporal concepts that may be considered in the design of hybrid work environments, as well as the impact of considering or not considering them; (ii) illustrating how these temporal concepts in a physical space can be augmented in the digital space, rather than assuming the digital space should simply represent the physical; and (iii) providing a framework for the consideration of time–aware hybrid work. We hope to spark scientific interest in studying the temporal nuances of hybrid work but also the temporal aspects of design in other areas.
Article
Full-text available
Abstract The article analyzes the intricacies of Virtual Employee Onboarding programs (VEO) from the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak and beyond. The paper aims to understand the strategic significance of the Virtual Onboarding process with recent corporate illustrations of onboarding programs. Besides, the literature discusses the ideal Virtual Onboarding process with examples of the commonly used tools. An effective VEO program is highlighted with the necessary conditions and the program components that should be incorporated to make an inclusive and enriching virtual onboarding experience. There are managerial implications drawn from the research: sophisticated, technology imbued virtual Onboarding can be designed, and the tools and company practices can be applied in the business context of Onboarding. Lastly, the challenges and emerging trends can be insightful to VEO practices for creating an amazing new employee onboarding experience. Keywords: Virtual Employee Onboarding, VEO, Covid-19, programs, experience.
Article
Full-text available
The Covid-19 pandemic has created a great transformation in business life and created a new working order. With the pandemic, activities of enterprises were interrupted and there were layoffs. The governments of many states have imposed dismissal bans, but this time employees were either put on unpaid leave or had to live with little support. Consequently, the financial situation of individuals deteriorated. Additionally, many businesses have switched to the remote working model with the pandemic. Whereby, it Araştırma Makalesi / Research Article Arş. Gör. Bumin Çağatay AKSU
Article
Full-text available
Research on social identification in organizations is diverse and evolving. As focus has shifted to the effects of multiple identities, there is a need to further define relationships between the three primary work identification targets (i.e., team, organization, and profession) and outcomes, specifically as to how each identification target explains variance in outcomes simultaneously. We meta-analytically test the relationship between each identification target and fifteen attitudes, three behaviors, and five general well-being variables at work with 483 studies and 557 independent samples (N = 179,442). We then provide evidence for the relative importance of each identification target through meta-analytic relative weights and regression analysis. Categorizing attitudes according to the same level (team, organization, profession), we found that organizational and team identification were most important in predicting "matching" attitudes, in support of the identity-matching principle. For professional-focused attitudes, behaviors, and general well-being, results were less clear; each identity target explained a range of variance in outcomes. There was a trend of team identification being the most important predictor, particularly for well-being. Through meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM), we tested the self-esteem hypothesis from social identity theory; results show that effects from identification to outcomes transmitted through self-esteem were weaker than direct effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Article
Full-text available
Drawing on two recent theories, this article proposes interaction hypotheses involving the joint effects of salient group versus individual identity and long-term versus short-term group membership on the social, interpersonal, and intellectual responses of group members collaborating via computer-mediated communication. Participants from institutions in two countries used computer-mediated communication under various conditions. Results indicate that some conditions of computer-mediated communication use by geographically dispersed partners render effects systematically superior to those obtained in other mediated conditions and greater or lesser than effects obtained through face-to-face interaction.
Article
This study investigated group collaboration performance and behavior differences with two different scenarios of communication. ANOVA results suggested that a group's overall performance was not affected by the communication technology used but some of the subdimension measures of performance varied. In addition, each group member's satisfaction varied significantly across different communication technologies.
Article
In response to the growing interest in issues related to attachment in organizations, this paper develops a theory of identification in the workplace based on three key aspects of structuration theory. In this model, the identification process is treated as a duality involving identities that create and are created by identifications, which are themselves observed in social interactions with others. The structural component of this model is composed of several possible identities conceptualized primarily in terms of regions varying in size or position and tenure, possessing front and back regions, and displaying both unique and overlapping regions with one another. The existence of multiple identities implicates multiple corresponding "targets" of attachment and expressions of connection. Activity and activity foci are included in the model to help define the situation and thus account for identification with one target as opposed to or along with others at various times. In this situation-sensitive view, activity is presumed to "link" to a certain identity region (or set of overlapping regions) more so than to others. The essay closes by discussing some of the advantages of a structurational view of identification.