By Niamh Williams (21-22)

Does the way you lead others affect how environmentally friendly their behaviours are? And do your organisational leaders have more influence over your environmental behaviours than you may have thought?

As concern over climate change grows, global temperatures soar, environmental degradation intensifies and its impacts become more visible, research into understanding the phenomenon and creating interventions to mitigate it and reverse it are becoming increasingly important.

Human activity has been long established as the key cause of climate change, with organisations acting as the driving force. Researchers have revealed that a cohort of only 20 firms (state-owned and multinational) are accountable for more than one-third of greenhouse gases emitted in the modern era (Taylor & Watts, 2019). Aside from these mammoth contributors, the majority of organisations contribute significantly to climate change and it is important that organisations understand their impact, but even more important for organisations to take action to reduce their emissions and improve their environmental performance to slow down climate change.

How this can be done has grasped the attention of organisational psychologists and researchers in other disciplines in conjunction with investors, stakeholders and civil society demanding for organisations to commit themselves to higher standards when it comes to environmental outcomes. An embryotic area of research investigating how organisations can do this is through exploring how leadership approaches influence the green behaviour of employees (EGB) in the workplace (simply put employees’ pro-environmental behaviours in the workplace, for instance recycling, throwing away wastepaper or turning off the lights).

A recent study sought to grow this area of research by investigating the influence of transformational versus transactional leadership on EGB in the workplace. These leadership approaches are diverse but interconnected. Transactional leaders rely on hierarchy and a system of rewards and punishments, whereas transformational leaders achieve organisational goals through inspiring and motivating their employees through example. Both have been shown to have a great impact on many organisational outcomes and employee performance and satisfaction. So, do leaders influence the environmental behaviours of employees?

To explore this question, a questionnaire was created that consisted of scales to measure EGB in the workplace, if the participants felt like they were being led by a transformational or transactional leader, and finally to expand the research, their levels of work commitment and self-efficacy. These individual factors were considered because EGB theory acknowledges that different employees can behave very differently in the workplace, which prompts the question – do individual factors affect how leadership influences EGB? Work commitment and self-efficacy were chosen as the individual factors to be explored as they have been well-established by previous research to have a significant impact a range of outcomes, including employee performance and satisfaction.

This questionnaire was distributed online, and once enough responses had been collected, the responses were analysed. The results showed that…

• Transformational leadership positively influences EGB.
• Transactional leadership does not influence EGB.
• Work commitment does not mediate the relationship between transformational leadership/ transactional leadership.
• Self-efficacy does not mediate the relationship between transformational leadership/ transactional leadership.

In essence, the study showed that the leadership approach taken by organisational leaders really can affect how environmentally friendly their employee’s behaviours are. Transformational leaders have a positive influence on their employee’s environmental behaviours for a few reasons. Firstly, transformational leaders are likely to have pro-environmental values and to champion social causes (Ng & Burke, 2010). Secondly, transformational leaders lead through inspiring others to work towards their vision (Ng & Burke, 2010). Lastly, transformational leaders consider employees as individuals thus creating an environment that emphasises the importance of acting in a value driven way (Changar & Atan, 2021). Based on the studies’ findings, and these explanatory factors, transformational leaders are in a powerful position to promote pro-environmental and sustainable behaviours in organisations.

The promotion of employees adopting pro-environmental behaviours in the workplace has a range of benefits to be reaped. Pro-environmental behaviours in the workplace contribute to strengthening the organisation’s environmental performance and aid the transition to lower carbon production. Not only will this benefit the environment and help with the mitigation of climate change, strong environmental performance outcomes of organisations are becoming increasingly important to investors and stakeholders (seen through the mainstreaming of ESG).

So, what can you do?

If you are a leader (whether that be of an entire organisation, a division or a team), consider how your values and environmental behaviours influence the values and environmental behaviours of your team. Take care to conserve energy and resources, reduce waste and increase recycling behaviours – lead by example. You should also consider adopting characteristics of a transformational leader. For instance, advocate environmentally friendly behaviours by discussing their values and importance with your employees. Leaders must also consider how to incentivise their employees to engage in such behaviours as well. Additionally, you should consider how you select your future leaders. By choosing candidates who have strong pro-environmental values and the traits of a transformational leader, you are setting up your organisation to become more environmentally friendly in the future.

If you are an employee, you should much of the same! This includes proactively conserving energy and resources, reducing waste and increasing recycling behaviours. The actions of individual employees do make a difference on the environmental performance of organisations. Additionally, employees should even advocate the benefits of pro-environmental behaviours in the workplace to their leaders. More sustainable business practises and improved environmental outcomes rely on the individuals in organisations to rally around these causes, set goals, and lead by example.

References

Changar, M. & Atan, T. (2021). ‘The Role of Transformational and Transactional Leadership

Approaches on Environmental and Ethical Aspects of CSR’. Sustainability, 13(3), 1-23/ https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1411

Ng, E. S., & Burke, R. J. (2010). Predictor of business students’ attitudes toward sustainable

business practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4), 603-615.

Taylor, M. & Watts, J. (2019). The Polluters.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed-20-firms-third-carbon-emissions (19/08/22)

By Summaya Abbas (21-22)

“Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master” – Christian Lous Lange.

What does the quote by Christian Lange really mean, and how does that relate to the workplace? Over the past few years, advancements in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) such as smartphones, emails, and instant messaging software have fundamentally changed the way employees communicate at work. For many organisations the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the rate at which technology was introduced to employees. In 2020, 86.7% of UK employees indicated use of a smartphone and laptop communicate, of which, 90.7% would not have been able to do their jobs without technology (Office for National Statistics, 2020). Crucially, although workplace technologies are known to provide several benefits, which include increased collaboration, flexibility, and perceived task accomplishment, there is a growing body of research to suggest they are more harmful to an employee’s psychological and physical well-being, therefore outweighing the benefits they provide (Derks et al., 2014).

But what does this mean for organisations?

Well, if technology can be seen as a “double-edged sword”, then there is a greater need to understand the negative impact of ICTs on employees to ensure the cost to organisations is limited, and the well-being of the employee is maintained. One consequence of increased mobile technology use is a construct known as workplace telepressure – which is an employee’s preoccupation and urge to respond to work related messages (Barber & Santuzzi, 2015). Workplace telepressure has led to employees viewing online communication in the same way they view in-person communication, such that, employees feel the need to respond to their colleagues, managers, and external clients immediately. To date, very little research has explored the consequences of experiencing workplace telepressure, but the general overview of research would suggest that workplace telepressure leads to higher levels of employee exhaustion (Gillet et al, 2022; Pfaffinger et al 2022). Notably, some research suggests that the reason workplace telepressure and exhaustion are related is because telepressure prevents employees from psychologically switching off from their working day, which subsequently results in the increased exhaustion (Barber et al, 2019). As mentioned, research in this area is still relatively new so there is still work to be done to confirm these findings.

Even more interestingly, since the COVID-19 pandemic there has been a 41% increase in the number of employees who have resigned from their jobs in search of pursuing their career ‘calling’ (Linkedin, 2022). Employees who view their work as a calling, conduct their work with greater intensity, which could imply there may be a relationship between a ‘career calling’ and workplace telepressure. If individuals work with greater intensity, it is likely they are online for longer, which could suggest they are experiencing greater workplace telepressure. This is important for organisations to understand because should career decisions have a negative impact on well-being long term, organisations need to have interventions in place to combat this.

The aim of this research was to re-confirm previous findings to determine if psychological detachment from work explains the negative impact telepressure has on well-being. It also extends research by exploring the role of a career ‘calling’ on workplace telepressure.

What did this research do?

The study recruited 165 full-time employees from a wide range of industries to include sales, marketing, HR, healthcare, teaching creative arts, and others. Employees were required to complete a short questionnaire that measured an employees work workplace telepressure, their ability to psychologically detach from the working day, exhaustion levels, and the extent to which they felt their career was their ‘calling’.

So, what did this study find?

            Firstly, the study found that employees experiencing greater levels of workplace telepressure, also experienced more exhaustion; meaning there is a relationship between telepressure and poor wellbeing. Secondly, it was discovered that employees who experienced more workplace telepressure, were less likely to psychologically detach from their working day. Thirdly, employees who were able to psychologically detach, experienced less exhaustion, and most importantly, the inability to psychologically detach from work explained why telepressure and exhaustion were related. Finally, a career ‘calling’ did not exacerbate the negative relationship between workplace telepressure and subsequent levels of detachment from the working day.

How can these findings be used?

            These findings have several theoretical and practical implications for organisations. From a theoretical perspective, this study provides further support to the limited research that has explored the negative impact of workplace telepressure so far. As with any research, there are limitations that must be considered, however, it is important to remember that in our current and ever-changing organisational landscape, up-to-date research is of great importance. New research enables us to confirm that previous findings within Organisational Psychology are applicable within current organisations, therefore allowing insightful conclusions to be drawn and initiatives to be developed.

            From a practical standpoint, the findings from this study suggest that psychological detachment has an important role to play in minimising the negative impact of workplace telepressure on employee exhaustion. Therefore, organisations must consider ways to ensure employees are given ample time to psychologically detach from work. Organisations could do this by:

1. Considering rolling out training programmes for managers to ensure they are mindful of their own ICT-based behaviour, and lead by example to facilitate detachment from the working day. As an example, managers should refrain from sending emails whilst employees are on annual leave, or late in the evenings, as this is known to impair psychological detachment (Van Laethem et al, 2018). This intervention can be implemented on a managerial and organisation wide level; businesses should seek to replicate initiatives introduced by the car manufacturer Volkswagen, who have configured their work servers so that emails can only be sent to an employee’s ICT device 30 minutes before and after the working day (Richardson, 2017).
2. Organisations should look to introduce policies regarding the functionality of communication apps to reduce workplace telepressure. Features such as “last seen” and “read”, are likely to exacerbate telepressure and subsequent levels of detachment as employees may feel a pressure to respond. Therefore, it could be useful to restrict all mobile ICTs from having these features.
3. Organisations could also look to educate employees on the benefits of psychological detachment by creating awareness days and running companywide well-being workshops. These should stress the importance of switching off from the working day and also include techniques to support employees from distancing themselves from workplace technologies such as smartphones and tablets.

Overall, technological innovation within the workplace will only continue to accelerate, organisations and practitioners should therefore act upon the findings of this study accordingly.

Blog References

Barber, L. K., Conlin, A. L., & Santuzzi, A. M. (2019). Workplace telepressure and Work–Life Balance Outcomes: The role of work recovery experiences. Stress and Health, 35(3), 350–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2864

Barber, L. K., & Santuzzi, A. M. (2015). Please respond ASAP: Workplace telepressure and employee recovery. Journal of Occupational HealthPsychology,20, 172–190 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038278

Derks, D., ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Zecic, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Switching on and off…: Does smartphone use obstruct the possibility to engage in recovery activities? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(1), 80-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2012.711013

Gillet, N., Morin, A. J., Fernet, C., Austin, S., & Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, T. (2022). Telepressure and recovery experiences among remote and onsite workers. Journal of Personnel Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000303

Linkedin. (2022). Linkedin Global Talent Trends 2022. https://business.linkedin.com/content/dam/me/business/en-us/talent-solutions-lodestone/body/pdf/global_talent_trends_emea_2022.pdf

Office for National Statistics. (2020). Technology intensity and homeworking in the UK. Retrieved from https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/technologyintensityandhomeworkingintheuk/2020-05-01#authors\

Pfaffinger, K. F., Reif, J. A., & Spieß, E. (2020). When and why telepressure and technostress creators impair employee well-being. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 28(2), 958–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2020.1846376

Richardson, K. M. (2017). Managing employee stress and wellness in the new millennium. Journal of occupational health psychology, 22(3), 423. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000066

Van Laethem, M., Van Vianen, A. E., & Derks, D. (2018). Daily fluctuations in smartphone use, psychological detachment, and work engagement: The role of workplace telepressure. Frontiers in psychology, 1808. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01808