Content uploaded by Koay Kian Yeik
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Koay Kian Yeik on Aug 15, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 71
Does Cyberloafing Really Harm
Employees’ Work Performance?: An
Overview
Kian-Yeik Koay and Patrick Chin-Hooi Soh
71.1 Introduction
In the present information era, successful deployment of information technologies is
key to achieving competitive advantage for organizations [33]. Internet technologies
should increase the productivity of organizations but this expectation does not hold in
the actual business world. This phenomenon has been called the “productivity para-
dox”. Despite its myriad benefits, Internet technologies have also engendered new
opportunities for novel forms of workplace deviant behaviours. Using the Internet
for non-productive purposes during working hours such as emailing, trawling social
media, surfing sports, news, entertainment sites and videos has become a new tempta-
tion for employees as an alternative to shirk at work [6,14,24]. The term referring to
employees’ personal Internet use at work is coined as cyberloafing [23]. Several ter-
minologies used in academic studies to describe this phenomenon are cyberslacking,
cyberslouching, non-work-related computing, junk computing and workplace Inter-
net leisure browsing [19,27]. Regarded as a form of production deviance behavior
[23], cyberloafing is defined as “a set of behaviours at work in which an employee
engages in electronically-mediated activities, particularly through the use of the
Internet, that his or her immediate supervisor would not consider job-related” [5].
According to Newswise [28], 60 to 80% of employees’ time on the Internet at work
is not related to their jobs. A survey of 3,200 Americans reported that 50 percent
of them waste more than two hours daily on non-work-related online activities,
costing employers $4500 per employees annually [17]. These statistics could be
under-reported [12]. Apart from the loss in productivity, cyberloafing is also associ-
ated with the increased risks of clogging up networks bandwidth, degrading system
K.-Y. Koay (B)
School of Business, Monash University Malaysia, Subang Jaya, Malaysia
e-mail: kian.koay@monash.edu
P. C.-H. Soh
Faculty of Management, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia
© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019
J. Xu et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Management
Science and Engineering Management, Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary
Industrial Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93351-1_71
901
902 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
performance and increased exposure to legal suits (e.g., employees download illegal
music or view offensive videos).
In order to reduce cyerloafing, companies have adopted several methods such as
implementing Internet usage policies, installing Internet monitoring system or/and
Internet-filtering systems and imposing punishments [16,20]. The main reason for
organizations to curtail employees from cyberloafing is based on the assumption that
cyberloafing must be injurious to work performance as it dissipates employees’ time,
energy, and concentration reserved for work-related tasks [8,15,36]. However, some
scholars suggest cyberloafing to be a form of work diversion that can potentially help
employees to arouse creativity, generate fresh ideas, reduce job stress and facilitate
mental recovery [5,18,29], which can potentially increase work performance and
creativity.
Academic research on the impact of cyberloafing on work performance is scant
with mixed findings. To fill up the gap in the current literature, the main objective
of this paper is to provide an overview on the impact of cyberloafing on employees’
work performance through a systematic literature review approach. This study will
first discuss the various impacts of cyberloafing on work performance. Subsequently,
the paper will provide some suggestions on managing the issue of cyberloafing in
the workplace. Lastly, this study concludes with a discussion of future research
directions.
71.2 Methodology
This study used a systematic literature review approach to evaluate and interpret
the current literature. Hence, a rigorous literature search process was adopted. First,
key words such as cyberloafing, cyberslacking, non-work related personal internet
use at work, non-work related internet use, non-work-related computing and work-
place Internet leisure browsing were searched through Scopus database. A total of
138 non-duplicated papers were obtained after removing the duplicated ones. The
authors read all the papers in full including the abstract and full-text. This is to ensure
that no relevant papers were excluded. These papers included peer-reviewed journal
papers, book chapters and conference proceedings and involved both qualitative and
quantitative studies. Through the reading process, the authors managed to discover
additional papers cited in the published papers that are related to the impact of cyber-
loafing on work performance. Papers that employed quantitative and experimental
research design were retained. A total of 12 papers related to the scope of this research
were finally retained.
71 Does Cyberloafing Really Harm Employees’ Work Performance?: An Overview 903
71.3 Discussion
An analysis on the results of the papers reveals that the relationship between cyber-
loafing and work performance has mixed results: positive, negative, no impact on
work performance. The summary of literature is presented in Table 71.1. Out of 12
studies, 2 were experimental studies and 10 were survey-based studies using cross-
sectional research design. Among the 10 survey-based studies, 8 studies measured
work performance using a self-reporting method while another 2 studies used a
supervisor-reporting method. To provide readers a better understanding regarding
the impact of cyberloafing on employees work performance, this paper discusses
each study in brief and highlights the factors that influence the relationship between
cyberloafing and work performance.
71.3.1 No Impact on Work Performance
Out of 12 studies, three studies reported that there is no significant relationship
between cyberloafing and work performance. Mahatanankoon et al. [26] were the
pioneers in exploring the relationship between cyberloafing and work inefficiency.
The study conceptualized cyberloafing as a three-dimensional constructs namely
personal e-commence, personal information research and personal communication.
Surprisingly, the results of structural equation modelling showed that all three dimen-
sions of cyberloafing do not have any significant relationship with work inefficiency.
Similarly, a recent study by Koay et al. [21] also tested the relationship between
cyberloafing and work performance on a sample of 301 employees from Malaysia
and found that cyberloafing has no significant impact on work performance. Oravec
[29] surmises that cyberloafing might have the ability to rejuvenate a person’s energy
and thus improve productivity once the employees get back to work. Predicated on
this respite perspective, Askew [4] proposed that cyberloafing has a positive rela-
tionship with task performance. In the study, cyberloafing was conceptualized as a
two-dimensional construct namely social cyberloafing and interactive cyberloafing.
However, the results did not support the proposed relationship. In other words, both
dimensions of cyberloafing do not have substantial effect on task performance.
71.3.2 Negative Impact on Work Performance
Five studies reported that there is a significant negative relationship between cyber-
loafing and work performance. Ramayah [32] conducted a research to validate the
findings of Mahatanankoon et al. [26] (who did not find any significant relationship
between cyberloafing and work inefficiency on a sample of 126 employees working in
Malaysia. Ramayah [32] reported that personal downloading, personal information
904 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
Table 71.1 A summary of the literature on the impact of cyberloafing on employees’ performance
Authors Dependent Definition Source of
rating
Sampling method Research
design
Main findings
Mahatanan-koon
et al. [26]
Wor k
inefficiency
“How the Internet and
e-mail have changed some
of the characteristics of
their current job in terms
of wasted time, reduced
time to complete work
and to go through
extraneous material, and
reduced amount of
re-work” (p. 99).
Self-reported 155 respondents from
part-time MBA
students and
non-students in the
United State
Cross-
sectional
survey
Three dimensions of
cyberloafing (personal
e-commence, personal
information research and
personal communication) are
not significantly related to
work inefficiency
Bock and Ho [9]Job
performance
Not specified Supervisor 71 employees
(11supervisors
involved) from six
multi-national
companies in
Singapore
Cross-
sectional
survey
Time spent on cyberloafing
has a significant negative
relationship with job
performance
Ramayah [32]Wor k
inefficiency
“Bad work performance
such as low productivity,
sloppy work, and
lateness” (p. 295)
Self-reported 126 employees
working in the Penang
Free Trade Zone with
access to the Internet
at their workplace
were surveyed in
Malaysia
Cross-
sectional
survey
The study showed that
personal downloading,
personal information research
and personal e-commerce
have an adverse impact on
work efficiency while
personal communication does
not have any impact
(continued)
71 Does Cyberloafing Really Harm Employees’ Work Performance?: An Overview 905
Table 71.1 (continued)
Authors Dependent Definition Source of
rating
Sampling method Research
design
Main findings
Coker [11]Wor ker
productivity
“The degree to which an
individual performs in the
workplace with respect to
attendance, quality of
work, performance
capacity and person
factors” (p. 239)
Self-reported 268 office workers
selected from a
commercial database
of market research
panellists in Australia
Cross-
sectional
survey
The study showed that those
who engage in WILB less
than 12% of total work time
have a positive impact on
work productivity.
Conversely, WILB more than
12% of total work time will
start experiencing negative
effect on work productivity
Askew [4]Tas k
performance
Not specified Supervisor 447 employees from
various companies
and 147 supervisors
involved in United
States.
Cross-
sectional
survey
No significant relationship
between cyberloafing and
task performance
Kuem and Siponon
[22]
Creative
performance
Determine based on the
number of ideas given by
respondents
– 40 graduate students
from a large
university in Finland
Experimental
study
In general, short time of
cyberloafing and low-effort
cyberloafing activities can
increase creative performance
Andreassen et al.
[3]
Job
performance
“Decreased productivity
at work due to health
issues or other matters
that side track one from
optimal productivity” (p.
2)
Self-reported 11,018 employed
respondents were
surveyed via a
web-based survey
administered by
SurveyXact
Cross-
sectional
survey
Personal social media use at
work is negatively related to
job performance
Quoquab et al. [31]Productivity Not specified Self-reported 282 employees in
Malaysia
Cross-
sectional
survey
A positive relationship
between cyberloafing
productivity is shown in the
study
(continued)
906 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
Table 71.1 (continued)
Authors Dependent Definition Source of
rating
Sampling method Research
design
Main findings
Corgnet et al. [13]Wor k
performance
Measured by the number
of correct maths
calculation
– 220 graduate students
were recruited for an
experimental research
Experimental
study
In short, the decision to turn
off the Internet access made
by group members leads to
higher productivity by
cyberloafers
Ali-Hassan et al.
[2]
Routine
performance
The performance of
mandatory job-related
tasks, duties and
responsibilities, all of
which are coordinated
and rewarded by the
organization (p. 66)
Self-reported 240 community
members
Cross-
sectional
survey
The relationship between
hedonic use of social media
in the workplace and
innovative performance is
partially mediated by number
of expressive ties while the
relationship between hedonic
use of social media in the
workplace and routine
performance is fully mediated
by cognitive dimension
Innovative
performance
“The production or
adoption of creative and
useful ideas, which are
implemented at work” (p.
66)
Charoensu-
kmongkol [10]
Job
performance
Not specified Self-reported 170 employees were
collected using
snowball sampling
method.
Cross-
sectional
survey
Social media use intensity at
work and job performance
Koay et al. [21]Wor k
performance
“The extent to which
employees are performing
their assigned tasks” (p. 4)
Self-reported 301 employees
workinginMSC
status companies
Cross-
sectional
survey
Cyberloafing is not
significantly related to work
performance
71 Does Cyberloafing Really Harm Employees’ Work Performance?: An Overview 907
research and personal e-commerce have adverse impact on work efficiency while
personal communication does not have any impact. One key difference between
these two studies was that Ramayah [32] expanded the cyberloafing scale by adding
a new dimension called personal downloading. Another study by Andreassen et al.
[3] focussed on the impact of using online social network sites for personal purposes
at work on job performance. The results of the study indicated a significant negative
relationship between online social network sites for personal purposes at work and
work performance. In the same vein, Ali-Hassan et al. [2] also found support for
the positive relationship between hedonic use of social media in the workplace and
routine job performance.
Another study by Bock and Ho [9] found that the more time employees spend
on cyberloafing, the lower their job performance, indicating that long duration of
cyberloafing can lead to lesser time for employees to complete their tasks. The result
is consistent with Askew [4] who found long duration of cyberloafing is negatively
related to task performance. The common explanation for such finding from these
studies is that cyberloafing waste employees’ time on work-related tasks, result-
ing in less time for them to complete mandated duties and tasks. Another possible
explanation is that cyberloafing may interrupt employees’ workflow and disrupt their
concentration resulting in spending more time to refocus based on work tasks due to
interruptions.
71.3.3 Positive Impact on Work Performance
ICoker [11] reported a positive relationship between cyberloafing and productiv-
ity. Instead of using the term cyberloafing with a negative connotation, the author
employs a term with positive connotation called workplace Internet leisure browsing
(WILB). Fascinatingly, the study showed that those who WILB actually score higher
in productivity than those who did not. To further identify the extent to which cyber-
loafing affects work productivity, a quadratic equation was employed to examine at
which point in where the percentage of time spent WILB (measured by hours spent
WILBing per week over average hours spent working in a week) would eventually
negatively impact productivity. The result showed there is a significant quadratic rela-
tionship between WILB and productivity; those who engage in WILB less than 12%
of total work time have a positive impact on work productivity. Conversely, WILB
more than 12% of total work time resulted in negative effects on work productivity.
Charoensukmongkol [10] found a positive link between social media use intensity
at work and job performance, implying that the more time employees spend on social
media at work, the higher the perceived work performance. In addition, Ali-Hassan et
al. [1] discovered that there is a significant positive relationship between hedonic use
of social media in the workplace and innovative performance. That is, hedonic use of
social media allows employees to share their personal problems with others, which in
turn result in innovative job performance. Another study of 282 Malaysian employees
by Quoquab et al. [31] supported the positive relationship between cyberloafing and
908 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
productivity. However, Quoquab et al. [31] study suffers from two major limitations
that could threaten the validity of the results. That is, the study does not provide the
definition and measurement of productivity and the conceptualization of cyberloafing
is unclear.
There are two possible explanations to the positive association between cyber-
loafing and work performance. First, as surmised by scholars, cyberloafing is indeed
able to improve employees’ innovative work performance by allowing employees to
seek for new ideas, thereby stimulating their creativity. However, the second possi-
ble explanation is the false sense of improved work performance by employees as
they may think that cyberloafing is a part of their work tasks at work. To be precise,
some employees might try hard to pretend to be industrious and do unimportant
things at work, trying to deceive and persuade themselves that they are indeed doing
something during work hours.
71.3.4 Situational Factors that Affect the Relationship
Between Cyberloafing and Performance
Corgnet et al. [13] conducted an experimental research to determine the influence
of organizational decision-making regimes on the implementation of Internet policy
in affecting productivity. Two hundred and twenty students were recruited and ran-
domly assigned into three different groups: a control group, a group with autocratic
decision-making condition and a group with group-voting decision-making condi-
tion. Each group consists of members who are cyberloafers and non-cyberloafers.
Group members are assigned work tasks involving simple mathematic calculations
on a computer. Correct answers have monetary rewards and the amount of earnings
representing productivity. Autocratic decision-making condition refers to a situation
in which the decision to cut-off the Internet connection is made by a single person,
whereby group-voting decision-making condition denotes a situation in which the
decision to cut-off the Internet connection is based on the group consensus. In the
control group, the students are allowed to use the Internet based on their discre-
tion. Researchers measured the groups productivity in two phases; before (phase
1) and after (phase 2) Internet connection were turned off. Interestingly, findings
revealed that cyberloafers in the group consensus decision-making show a signifi-
cant increase in productivity from phase 1 to phase 2, whereas cyberloafers in the
autocratic decision-making group show no significant increase in productivity. These
suggest that using force to halt employees from cyberloafing is not an efficacious
strategy and might even result in other forms of slacking. In contrast, group consen-
sus decision-making to stop cyberloafing can reduce the negative effects because of
higher levels of perceived procedural justice.
Creativity, defined as “the ability to produce work that is both novels (i.e., original,
unexpected) and appropriate (i.e., useful, adaptive concerning task constraints)” [35],
plays a paramount role in driving organizational innovation, growth and success
71 Does Cyberloafing Really Harm Employees’ Work Performance?: An Overview 909
[30]. Asserted by Oravec [29], cyberloafing can serve as a stimulant for the arousal
of creativity. Drawing on these reasons, a two by two factorial between-subject
experimental design was employed to determine whether cyberloafing leads to better
creativity [22]. Forty graduate student respondents were separated into four groups
with 10 respondents each. The experiment for group 1 and group 2 was conducted
in the morning and for group 3 and group 4 were conducted in the afternoon. Both
morning and afternoon sessions involved 3 stages which are pre-test stage, break
stage, and post-test stage. In the pre-test stage, creative performance was measured
for each group. Creative performance was measured by the number of idea generated
by respondents. In the break stage, all groups were given 15min breaks but only
Group 2 and 4 were allowed to cyberloaf. In the post-test, all respondents were given
10 min to generate a list of ideas. Interestingly, the study showed that cyberloafing
stimulates creativity most when it is engaged in the afternoon and when the engaged
cyberloafing activities require low cognitive efforts such as Facebook, Twitter and
social networking sites. In summary, there are three important findings in the study (1)
those who are not allowed to cyberloaf during the break have no significant increase
in creative performance; (2) those who cyberloaf in the afternoon tend to have a
significant improvement on their creative performance than those who cyberloaf in
the morning; (3) cyberloafing activities that require low cognitive effort such as social
media has a stronger positive impact on creative performance than those require high
cognitive effort like e-shopping.
71.3.5 Ways to Improve Work Performance Through
Cyberloafing
Typical approaches to dealing with cyberloafing include Internet use policies, train-
ing, enforcement, punishment and monitoring system [20]. However, instead of com-
pletely banning employees from cyberloafing, which could reduce job satisfaction
[34], this paper suggests for a reconstruction of the existing Internet management
approach that aims for a better productivity. Based on the findings of the literature
review, this paper discusses some useful suggestions on how to enhance the existing
methods of controlling cyberloafing.
Firstly, according to the findings of past studies, the duration of time seems to
be a crucial moderating factor that affects the relationship between cyberloafing and
job performance. That is, a short duration of cyberloafing can be beneficial to work
performance, especially of those whose jobs require high level of creativity. This
is because cyberloafing allows employees to obtain updated market information
or novel business ideas through reading online news or visiting information web-
sites, which can be informative and valuable for their work. However, organizations
constantly face the issue of employees abusing the freedom given by spending too
much time on non-work-related online activities. The worst part is that employees
always pretend to work hard by “clicking” hard (e.g., browsing social networking
910 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
sites, online shopping and sending personal e-mail) during work hours. Spending
too much time on cyberloafing can interrupt employees work flow [25]. Hence, we
suggest that employers could install a software or a special alert system in the office
computers that will send a notification to employees if they cyberloaf for more than
15 min. Furthermore, considering employees may ignore the notification, the Internet
connection to leisure websites (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Youtube) should be banned
when the quota for cyberloafing is used up. We suggest the maximum daily quota
given should not be more than 1 hour or 12% of the total working hours because it
is the point when productivity start to deteriorate [11].
Secondly, engaging in high cognitive effort cyberloafing activities, such as watch-
ing pornography, playing online games, engaging in online betting and doing per-
sonal financial investment, can deplete an employee’s personal resources (e.g., time,
energy, attention and concentration), which can negatively affect the performance
of subsequent work tasks due to depletion of personal resources. Hence, employers
are encouraged to block the Internet access to certain websites or applications that
absorb employees personal resources.
Thirdly, it is getting common for employees to cyberloaf through their Internet-
enabled devices such as smartphones, notebooks, laptops and Ipads, which can cir-
cumvent the restriction of Internet access placed by organizations and avoid being
detected for cyberloafing. This situation can be tricky for organizations because track-
ing employees’ Internet activities on their personal Internet-enabled devices is not a
practically viable strategy and can violate the law. In this case, some managers might
need to be firm with those who cyberloaf excessively and reprimand such abuse with
punishment. However, this strategy requires managers to lead by example. That is,
the managers themselves must not cyberloaf.
Lastly, employees should be co-opted into the committee designing the Internet
policies in order to facilitate worker-perceived procedural justice and employees’
cooperation for the consensus Internet policies [13]. At the very least, employers
should communicate to employees regarding Internet usage policies through trainings
or seminars so that when punishments are imposed on Internet violators, employees
will understand the reason for the punishments.
71.4 Conclusion and Future Directions
It is not appropriate to derive a definitive conclusion with regard to the impact of
cyberloafing on employees’ work performance for two critical reasons. First, the
rapid technological advancement has given rise to new forms of cyber-activities. This
will require regular re-examination of the dimensionality of the cyberloafing scale.
Recently, Akbulut et al. [1] reassessed the extant cyberloafing scales and concluded
that old cyberloafing scales are obsolete [7,23,26]. They therefore developed a new
cyberloafing scale consisting of five dimensions: sharing, shopping, real-time updat-
ing, accessing online content and gaming/gambling. We surmise that each dimension
of cyberloafing affects work performance differently. As such, it is not possible to
71 Does Cyberloafing Really Harm Employees’ Work Performance?: An Overview 911
assess the true impact of cyberloafing on work performance without considering the
specific dimensions of cyberloafing.
There are some important areas that future scholars should be aware of when
conducting a research on cyberloafing and work performance. Firstly, cyberloaf-
ing is a multi-dimensional construct and the essence of the construct changes as
the Internet technology continues to advance. Future research needs to re-examine
existing cyberloafing scale to ensure that it is up-to-date, complete and appropriate.
Secondly, work performance is also a multi-dimensional construct. Conceptualising
work performance as a general construct yields a narrow insight on the impact of
cyberloafing on work performance. Thirdly, evidence has shown that the relation-
ship between cyberloafing and work performance is not linear all the time and can
be curvilinear [11]. Fourthly, the limitations of self-reported performance and cross-
sectional research design can limit the validity of findings (e.g., social desirability
biases). Researchers are advised to capture respondents’ performance evaluation by
their supervisors, to capture the extent of cyberloafing using computerised logging
and to employ longitudinal research design. Finally, it would be intriguing to see
how cyberloafing would impact workers’ work performance across different indus-
tries such as academic and business world.
References
1. Akbulut Y, Dursun OO et al (2016) In search of a measure to investigate cyberloafing in
educational settings. Comput Hum Behav 55(PB):616–625
2. Ali-Hassan H, Nevo D, Wade M (2015) Linking dimensions of social media use to job perfor-
mance: the role of social capital. J Strat Inf Syst 24(2):65–89
3. Andreassen CS, Torsheim T, Pallesen S (2014) Use of online social network sites for personal
purposes at work: does it impair self-reported performance? Compr Psychol 3(1):article no. 18
4. Askew KL (2012) The relationship between cyberloafing and task performance and an exam-
ination of the theory of planned behavior as a model of cyberloafing. Diss Theses Gradworks
63(2):360–361
5. Askew K, Buckner JE et al (2014) Explaining cyberloafing: the role of the theory of planned
behavior. Comput Hum Behav 36(2):510–519
6. Blanchard AL, Henle CA (2008) Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing: the role of
norms and external locus of control. Comput Hum Behav 24(3):1067–1084
7. Blau G, Yang Y, Ward CK (2006) Testing a measure of cyberloafing. J Allied Health 35(1):9
8. Block W (2001) Cyberslacking, business ethics and managerial economics. J Bus Eth
33(3):225–231
9. Bock GW, Ho SL (2009) Non-work related computing (NWRC). ACM
10. Charoensukmongkol P (2014) Effects of support and job demands on social media use and
work outcomes. Comput Hum Behav 36(7):340–349
11. Coker BLS (2011) Freedom to surf: the positive effects of workplace internet leisure browsing.
New Technol Work Employ 26(3):238–247
12. Conner C (2012) Employees really do waste time at work, forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/
cherylsnappconner/2012/07/ 17/employees-really-do-waste-time-at-work/#3c4148412412
13. Corgnet B, Hernán-González R, McCarter MW (2015) The role of the decision-making
regime on cooperation in a workgroup social dilemma: an examination of cyberloafing. Games
6(4):588–603
912 K.-Y. Koay and P. C.-H. Soh
14. D’Abate CP (2005) Workinghard or hardly working: a study of individuals engaging in personal
business on the job. Hum Relat 58(8):1009–1032
15. Galletta DF, Polak P (2003) An empirical investigation of antecedents of internet abuse in the
workplace. In Proceedings of the second annual workshop on HCI Research in MIS
16. Glassman J, Prosch M, Shao BBM (2015) To monitor or not to monitor: effectiveness of a
cyberloafing countermeasure. Inf Manag 52(2):170–182
17. Gouveia A (2013) 2013 wasting time at work survey
18. Ivarsson L, Larsson P (2012) Personal internet usage at work: a source of recovery. Eur J
Pharmacol 789(1):439–448
19. Kim SJ, Byrne S (2011) Conceptualizing personal web usage in work contexts: a preliminary
framework. Comput Hum Behav 27(6):2271–2283
20. Kimberly Y (2010) Policies and procedures to manage employee internet abuse. Comput Hum
Behav 26(6):1467–1471
21. Koay K, Soh P, Chew K (2017) Antecedents and consequences of cyberloafing: evidence from
the Malaysian ICT industry. First Monday 22(3–6)
22. Kuem J, Siponen M (2014) Short-time non-work-related computing and creative performance.
In: Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 3215–3223
23. Lim VKG (2002) The IT way of loafing on the job: cyberloafing, neutralizing and organizational
justice. J Organ Behav 23(5):675–694
24. Lim VKG, Chen DJQ (2012) Cyberloafing at the workplace: gain or drain on work? Behav Inf
Technol 31(4):343–353
25. Macklem K (2006) You’ve got too much mail. Maclean’s 119(5):20–22
26. Mahatanankoon P, Anandarajan M, Igbaria M (2004) Development of a measure of personal
web usage in the workplace. Cyberpsychol Behav Impact Internet Multimed Virtual Real Behav
Soc 7(1):93
27. Moody GD, Siponen M (2013) Using the theory of interpersonal behavior to explain non-work-
related personal use of the internet at work. Inf Manag 50(6):322–335
28. Newswise (2013) Policy, enforcement may stop employees from wasting time online at work
29. Oravec JA (2002) Constructive approaches to internet recreation in the workplace 45(1):60–63
30. Parjanen S (2012) Experiencing creativity in the organization: from individual creativity to
collective creativity. Interdiscip J Inf Knowl Manag 7:109–128
31. Quoquab F, Halimah S, Salam ZA (2015) Does cyberloafing boost employee productivity? In:
International symposium on technology management and emerging technologies, pp 119–122
32. Ramayah T (2013) Personal web usage and work inefficiency. Bus Strat 11(11):295–301
33. Sharma SK, Gupta JND (2004) Improving workers’ productivity and reducing internet abuse.
Data Proces Better Bus Educ 44(2):74–78
34. Stanton JM (2002) Company profile of the frequent internet user. ACM
35. Sternberg RJ, Lubart TI (1999) The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. Handbook
of creativity, pp 3–15
36. Young KS (2004) Internet addiction: a new clinical phenomenon and its consequences. Am
Behav Scient 48(4):402–415
