By Laurel Spector (21-22)

Due to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic and accelerating technological advancements, many organisations have shifted to a remote style of employment. The pandemic made a permanent change to the way many businesses will operate forever, as all the benefits of remote working surfaced. For individual employees the positives of remote work include a more flexible lifestyle and less time/cost commuting to work. On a business level, organisations no longer needed provide their employees with office spaces, which can be costly, and could hire candidates from a more diverse background as the talent pool increased.

However, because of the shift, organisations must figure how to manage employees on a telecommuting basis and maintain their well-being, stability, and productivity. Two central types of remote work emerged, being synchronous remote work and asynchronous remote working type. A remote employee who works in synchronous style has set hours they log into telecommuting platforms (i.e. Zoom, Slack, Microsoft Teams) and are expected to respond immediately. For example, a remote worker who has consistent, daily scheduled meetings works synchronously. Conversely, one who works asynchronously has more flexibility of choosing their own work hours and are not expected to respond to work demands immediately. A freelance worker is an example of an asynchronous worker—they create work hours that best fits their lifestyle and not required to work simultaneously with others.

To represent the vast new population of remote workers, there are new factors being studied in Industrial Organisational Psychology. Traditionally, organisations study factors that can affect employee and organisational outcomes, such as well-being, job satisfaction (an employee’s overall attitude and feelings towards their job), and turnover intention (how much an employee thinks about wanting to leave their current employment). These organisational outcomes are normally studied along with factors within the work (i.e. work stress, job control) to see how they can negatively or positively impact the outcomes.

Remote work has created new factors that affect how employees view and complete their jobs. One new factor that can impact organisational outcomes is referred to as workplace telepressure, or the impulse and preoccupation for employees to immediately respond to work tasks. This is issue especially influential within remote workers because of the heavy use of technology. The nature of remote work has employees rely on telecommuting platforms for completing work tasks. Remote employees with high levels of telepressure struggle to separate work demands and personal relaxation. The constant thoughts about work tasks are a problem because it prolongs feelings of work stress (Barber et al., 2019).

Traditionally, when studying remote work, it is compared to hybrid and in-person style of work. The aim of study was to have a sample taken from only fully remote workers and compare how the different styles (asynchronous and synchronous) can impact work outcomes. This study adds information to past studies that found general connections between telepressure and the organisational outcomes (job satisfaction and turnover intention). Additionally, explores if asynchronous or synchronous remote work type is more beneficial to both the employee and organisation.

To conduct this study, an anonymous survey was distributed over the course of three weeks across social media platforms (LinkedIn) and professional networks. Only fully remote workers could qualify for the survey, excluding hybrid and in-person workers. A total of 146 remote employees participated in the survey, where they completed the telepressure scale, job satisfaction scale, turnover intention (TIS-6) scale, and demographics (age, education, gender, income satisfaction, and country of residence). These data showed participants were mostly female, an average age of 39, had a university degree, and resided in a western country.

To clean and analyse these data, the statistical program RStudio was used. First, an analysis was completed to see if there is a relationship between telepressure levels affecting job satisfaction and turnover intention. Secondly, added in remote work type to explore if the different types (synchronous or asynchronous) of remote work affects employees’ relationship with their jobs. Other connections within the data were also examined to find more valuable findings.

The results discovered that remote employees’ telepressure levels do cause turnover intention levels to change. This means that the more remote employees think about work tasks during off work hours and feel the need to instantaneously reply, they are more likely to move to a different organisation. However, whether an employee works asynchronously (the more independent remote work style) or synchronously (set, scheduled work from home hours) made no substantial difference in how much they think about leaving their current organisation. Additionally, it was discovered that telepressure does not significantly change a remote employees’ job satisfaction. In other words, how much employees think about work tasks off hours does not have a major effect on how much they are satisfied with their job. Working either an asynchronous or synchronous style of remote employment does not influence the satisfaction levels either.

This present study added to necessary research to better understand the population of remote workers. The study explored how the different types within remote work could affect people who work from homes’ behaviours. This is important to study so organisations know which style is more beneficial to the organisation and their employees. It also supports past bodies of research that found employees who have high telepressure are more willing to leave their current job; the current study adds to this by showing the connection remains within the fully remote workforce.

Organisations can use this information gained to better understand how telepressure and work type affects the behaviours of their remote employees. Organisations should apply this by implementing programs to support lowering telepressure. For example, organisations could aid this by not requiring their employees to send emails unless they are working on the clock. Supervisors and employers could set examples by not sending emails during off work periods. Furthermore, companies could provide their remote workers with separate work phones to limit seeing work demands on their personal device. The second main findings show organisations can implementing either type of remote work should not affect employee outcomes. They can choose synchronous or asynchronous with knowing it should not significantly affect job satisfaction and turnover intentions.

By Amrita Labana (21-22)

There are ways to measure career progression, however, this research examines the barriers and enablers of south-Asian women’s career in England. The contribution of women today in labour market is much higher than few decades ago, (pwc, n.d.), this change to demographics of workforce is gradual. The change is gradual because there are certain barriers which make women’s progression difficult, till now, women representation in leadership, private and public sector is less.

The financial status of women in western culture has continued to change overtime, in 20^th century with more women entering the labour market. Earlier on, women held less paid occupation and the situation has progressively improved with more and more women becoming the part of organisation leadership position. However, some organizations consider women less committed to work and limits opportunities for progression in Organisational hierarchy (Jauregui, 2018). To add context to the above arguments, in Belgium as per law passed by the government (2011), imposing gender quotas for women in Public Organisations. With government initiatives and increasing amount of women representation in labour market, still women are underrepresented in the decision-making process in Organisations. Despite the gender law in place in Belgium although the number of women executives have increased over time, however, only 16% of positions in executive companies in large Belgian companies are held by women as comparative to men (Audrey, 2021). Although the number are increasing still the gender bias is evident in the Organisational Culture and this study will focus on South-Asian women. This example represents the women in western countries and this research dissertation will consider the plight of South Asian Women, the career challenges, and enablers. This research particularly focuses on south-Asian women, because of under representation of this group of women.

This aim of this study is to bring to light barriers and enablers that affect the career progression of women, in-depth interview of 14 south-Asian women were conducted and data was analysed using thematic analysis and the following themes emerged: the barriers are Gender bias and Microaggression, Microaggression and hostile Organisational Practices and Network of Relationships; the enablers are Mentoring and Coaching.

Through the lens of these barriers and enablers, the theoretical implications were discussed, and major findings mapped to key theories of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Social Capital, and Glass ceiling effect.

The methodology used for this study is qualitative, as there is little qualitative research on career aspiration of south Asian women. Thematic analysis was selected to be a suitable method to answer the research question, as it implies deductive analysis for integration of theories.

Semi-structures interviews of 14 South-Asian women were conducted employing open-ended questions and transcribed verbatim.  The qualitative research is helpful in providing rich description of complex events and experiences. Qualitative research is rigorous, systematic and have the capacity to integrate theories to the research agenda.

Interpretation of Results

South-Asian women experience unconscious biases, that have negative effect on their career progression:  Stereotyping and Gender bias enhancing the glass ceiling effect:

Gender stereotypes have prevailed in the society from centuries, and is transmitted through social, educational, and cultural socialization. Although most gender biases and barriers have declined over the years, but the gender stereo types continue to effect women’s carrier progression. The gender stereotypes can be defined broadly as organisational or cultural (Tabassum, 2021). Stereotyping against women can be defined as in-group and out-group stereotyping. Over the years workforce has always been dominated by men than women. Looking few decades back, women were considered incapable of being physicians, engineers, or leaders and till date women are underrepresented in few many of these fields (Filut, 2017). The race bias first identified by Patricia Devine is defined as unintentional influence of stereotype-based preconceived assumptions about a group occur when associating the member of the group, (Devine, 1989). The south-Asian women are subject to unconscious biases, it can be the underlying cause for transparent barrier faced by them.

Flawed diversity practices in male dominated organisation effect progression negatively: Taking into consideration, the theme of microaggression and hostile organisational culture and finding of study conducted by Hirayama and Fernando (2018) argues that organisational culture, i.e., their values, beliefs and expectations of perfect fit, influence women’s career advancement. Several women experienced micro aggressive behaviours specifically in the form culture bias and toxic work environment. Interestingly, existing research suggest that motherhood still limits the career progression of women even in the professions dominated by women for example nursing (McIntosh). Perhaps, motherhood definitively restricts women career development in corporate organisation.

Women consider mentorship and sponsorship enhance career progression

From the current research literature, it is evident that mentorship enhances women career progression as comparative to men.

The aim of this study is to investigate the challenges faced by south-Asian women while developing their career. It is never enough for women to have the necessary qualifications and competencies to progress. However, for their career progression women must work extra hard to prove their strong professional standing and to progress.  Women are challenged more to prove their abilities than male counterparts, and explicitly build a network of relations to succeed in workplace.

Over the past decade, there is significant change in organisations policies, today’s workplace is more is diverse and inclusive of women workforce, however, gender and cultural bias still exist to some extent. The reason for the cultural bias can be societal and this should be addressed at home first and then workplace. The basic intervention can include the diversity training in our schools than in organisations. We as society should address gender role sat social level and impart diversity education at secondary level. The first learning happens in our homes and society.

By Natalie Berkoff

Climate change and global warming are creating widespread and dangerous disruptions in nature and for humans throughout the world. This has been predominantly caused by human behaviour of burning fossil fuels for power generation, which releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This has led to devastating impacts on the environment, including natural disasters, extreme weather, and resource depletion. This has also led to negative impacts on human health and wellbeing, including post-traumatic stress, malnutrition, illness, and in extreme cases, injury, and death.

100 major companies have accounted for a substantial proportion of industrial greenhouse gas emissions, which has added to these climate problems. Therefore, the participation of organisations in the process of climate mitigation and adaptation is essential to combat climate change and global warming. So, it is important for organisations to encourage employees’ positive environmental behaviours at work, which often translates to positive environmental behaviours at home.

Research investigating environmental behaviour has increased substantially in recent years, prompted by the negative impacts on the environment and human well-being. Behaviour has been explored by psychologists using a multitude of different theories, but the two that influenced this study are the Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Values Beliefs Norms theory. Past research has used both theories to explain behaviours in various settings, regarding a diverse range of issues.

The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been used to examine positive environmental behaviour (Ajzen, 1985, 1991). The theory proposes that an individual’s attitude and perceived control over their behaviour, and social pressures from others influence their intention to behave in a certain way. Their intention to behave then influences their behaviour.

The Values Beliefs Norms theory indicates that if an individual believes that valued objects are threatened and believe that their actions can help to restore those valued objects, they will experience an obligation for action and support (Stern et al., 1999). This theory has been extended into the Values Beliefs Norms Theory of Environmentalism and can explain and predict positive environmental behaviours.

This study took influence from these two theories, with a focus on environmental attitudes and beliefs, which underpin both theories. This study aimed to examine if they influence environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace. Environmental behaviours including recycling, printing, and electricity use at home and in the workplace were measured. There is extensive previous research investigating environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace separately. However, relatively few studies have explored whether there are similarities or differences between the two locations. Therefore, this study examined if environmental attitudes and beliefs influence environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace and if there is a difference between the two locations.

The aims of this study:

• To discover whether individual environmental attitudes and beliefs impact environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace.
• To discover if there was a difference between environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace.

The study was conducted as a case study on the employees of an environmental sustainability consultancy. The data was collected through an online questionnaire, which was sent to employees via email, and took around ten minutes to complete. The employees who took part in the questionnaire did so voluntarily. 122 employees completed the survey (48.4% female, 49.2% male, 2.4% other). The questionnaire measured individual attitudes towards the environment, individual beliefs about the environment, general environmental behaviour at home and then in the workplace, and recycling behaviour at home and then in the workplace.

Key findings:

• Employee’s environmental attitudes predicted environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace.
• Employee’s environmental beliefs predicted environmental behaviour at home and in the workplace, but to a smaller extent than environmental attitudes.
• Employee’s environmental behaviours did not differ between the home and the workplace.

These findings demonstrated that attitudes towards the environment impact environmental behaviour, which is in line with the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Environmental beliefs also influence behaviour, but only when combined with environmental attitudes. This study found that beliefs alone had a small impact on environmental behaviour. This could indicate that combining values beliefs and norms may be a better way to examine environmental behaviour than beliefs alone. The findings have positive implications for the two theories, as it shows that they are still relevant and applicable to research over twenty years after being created. These findings also have positive implications for the host company, as they indicate that employees share the values of the company they work for.

This study found no differences in environmental behaviour between the home and the workplace, which is in line with some previous research. It is informative for organisations planning environmental interventions to improve environmental behaviour in employees in the workplace and at home. As the employee’s behaviour was consistent between the home and the workplace, the information provided to employees in interventions should be consistent too. The interventions should target improving employee attitudes and beliefs towards the environment, as well as creating a working environment that is accessible for behaving in an environmental way. This could include having recycling bins for disposing of different waste, which are clearly labelled and visible, having lights and computers that switch off automatically, or having a limit on the number of pages each employee can print per week.

Ultimately, it is down to the major companies who release copious amounts of industrial greenhouse gases to change their behaviour to create the most change. However, increased environmental behaviour within smaller organisations and at home will reduce energy use, reduce waste, and increase recycling, leading to positive impacts on the environment. If a substantial number of organisations implement behavioural interventions and the above recommendations, it could lead to increased positive environmental behaviour of employees, reducing the negative impact on the environment, and creating a better world for the future.

By Renee Rapier (21-22)

Upon the announcement of COVID-19 being declared a global pandemic in 2020, organisations and employees were left in a state of absolute chaos. Now, roughly three years later, the way business is conducted has changed forever. While before the pandemic the idea of remote work and more specifically, working from home was not an entirely new concept, the idea of enforced working from home due to a global pandemic was. Employees at every stage of their careers were forced to conduct work from home whilst bracing for the impacts of COVID-19. Employees across the globe were abruptly placed in a new evolution of working arrangements that seemed to be constantly changing. COVID-19 gave employees a new attitude toward their employers, careers, and overall relationship with work. This study analysed how employees at the early stages of their careers have embraced the trials and tribulations of the evolving working arrangements brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. While the pandemic has progressed there has been a shift from employees working fully remote to a now hybrid arrangement. This study adds new insight into understanding the experiences employees in the early stages of their careers have undergone throughout these transitions. The study was conducted with employees under thirty years old to gain awareness of a population still relatively novice in their career but have held employment at a time before the pandemic to allow for reflection. This study targeted those under thirty because although not senior in their organisation, they are the future of the organisation. Participants reflected on the past while envisaging their future concerning their relationship with work. The findings were captured from interviews of participants asking predetermined questions regarding elements relating to their experiences throughout transitioning working arrangements throughout the pandemic. The analysis of the interviews was conducted using thematic analysis with guidelines proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006). Upon analysis, three main themes were identified from the participant’s interviews: organisational support, elements of hybrid working, and accepting the present.

See Figure 1 for the main themes and subthemes.

Figure 1. Themes and subthemes. Percentages represent who provided data that contribute to each theme and subtheme. 

Organisational Support

Support from the employees’ organisations was related to the overall ease employees felt throughout their changing work arrangements throughout the pandemic. Perceptions of the organisations were swayed based on the support that was provided to the employees. It was understood that if the organisation did not supply the correct support to their employees the employees did not view them as positive. Furthermore, it did not go unnoticed when organisations went above and beyond for their employees during times of unease. As mentioned by Tyler, “it made me feel lucky I worked for a good company” (Tyler).

Elements of Hybrid Working

These elements contain the matter-of-fact components that occurred while hybrid working. These pragmatic aspects do not negate the emotions that were attached to experiences employees encountered while hybrid working such as ‘accountability’, having a ‘routine’, experiencing ‘autonomy’, and navigating ‘blurred boundaries’. Undergoing a trial and error cycle while working from home seemed to be a collective experience felt by the employees.  From understanding past mistakes, employees found what worked for them and what did not in terms of productivity, efficiency, and well-being whilst hybrid working.

Accepting the Present

An emotional shift was identified in the participant’s narratives throughout the evolution of their working arrangements. This shift allowed those to accept their working arrangements and occurred once the participants understood the positives of their new working arrangements and offered the outlook that it would not have occurred unless COVID-19 happened. Being able to appreciate COVID-19, while it was a terrible thing to happen, has some positives, “although COVID-19 was a terrible thing there’s definitely some long-term benefits from it”. 

The job demands-resources model (Demerouti et al., 2001) and paradox theory (Lewis, 2000) provide an understanding of the abovementioned findings by offering a helpful lens in interpreting the experiences employees in the earlier stages of their careers have shared in response to evolving working arrangements throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The job demands-resources model (JD-R), a widely used framework in occupational literature, explains the bearing of job resources and demands. As job resources are factors that can help buffer the stress and strain that can arise from job demands (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017). The JD-R model supports the narratives involved with explaining whether or not the transitions were easy and aligned this with the availability of resources received from their organisations. The paradox theory, when applied to the context within organisations, offers a new mindset. Applying a paradox mindset can enable its users to survive and thrive during times of ambiguity in organisational life by welcoming tensions and can also provide support to them (Lewis, 2000; Smith & Lewis, 2011). The employees utilise a paradox mindset by interacting with the tensions of their everchanging work arrangements and respond by having a positive mindset when speaking about the new positives that only arrived from COVID-19. They appreciated the new outcomes and this allowed employees to take on the day with competing tensions by looking at the brighter side of the situation.

Recommendations

This study has supplied recommendations for both employees and organisations to consider  

• Organisations and their employees should have a dialogue regarding work and home boundaries
• Employers should provide ample resources to employees 
• Employees should communicate their needs or hardships to management  
• Organisations should consider paradox mindset training throughout times of uncertainty

References

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and             looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273-285.

 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research     in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. 

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-         resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512. 

Lewis, M.W. (2000). Exploring paradox: toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of          Management Review, 25(4), 760-776.

Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium         model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, (36), 381-403.

By Alex Burrage (21-22)

The impact of work on employee well-being – is effective recovery the answer?

Employee well-being has received heightened interest in recent years with the risk of negative work-related outcomes including burnout, depression and anxiety becoming increasingly prominent. The Health and Safety Executive (2021) Labour Force Survey estimated that in 2021/22, 914,000 workers in the UK were suffering work-related stress, depression or anxiety, leading to a loss of approximately 17 million working days. They also found that the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic were a major contributory factor suggesting that these issues are becoming increasingly prevalent. Organisations and researchers have traditionally understood the impact of work on employee well-being by considering the balance of job demands and the resources that employs possess to cope with these stressors (JDR; Bakker & Demourouti, 2017). However, more recently, there has been a shift to consider how employees can recover effectively from work during their non-work time (e.g., evenings, weekends and vacations). Sonnentag and Fritz (2007) outlined four recovery experiences that may assist employees in counteracting stressor: Psychological detachment, not thinking about work during non-work time; relaxation, having a low activation level; mastery, facing a positive challenge to new experiences; and control, having a feeling of control over non-work time. Whilst each recovery experience manifests differently, they all reduce strain by allowing employees to adequately recover from job stressors (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006). Effective recovery from work has been associated with an array of outcomes including employee health, stress management, and life satisfaction (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). The most widely applied theoretical explanation for this relationship between job stressors, psychological detachment and employee well-being is the stressor-detachment model (SDM; Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015). This model suggests that detaching from work is a key factor in predicting strain and when we detach from work, we can weaken the relationship between stressors and strain.

How does what we think about during our non-work time impact on our recovery?

More recently, driven by the technological advancements in modern working practices, researchers have explored how we think about work during our non-work time may impact on recovery. Initially, work-related thoughts were seen as detrimental to recovery by reducing the ability for employees to detach from work. However, a study by a group of researchers suggested it is the typeof thoughts that determine any association with negative well-being impacts (Jiminez et al., 2022). For example, it has been suggested that thinking about work in a positive way or problem-solving during non-work time can benefit employee well-being (Sonnentag & Niessen 2020). This appears to make sense on the face of it, with negative thoughts such as worry likely to impact how we recover from a stressful day. However, thinking about how you will tackle a work-related problem the next day is perhaps less likely to cause harm.

‘Switching off’ and ‘leaving work at work’ – is this the best strategy?

Despite the rise in ‘always on’ culture and the ability to ‘work from anywhere, anytime’ across a wide range of organisations, there is still a general perception that you should ‘switch off’ when you leave work and not complete tasks you may have left unfinished. Researchers have become interested in how unfinished tasks may impact well-being in recent years, with emerging evidence suggesting having unfinished tasks at work can have a negative impact on sleep (Syrek & Antoni, 2014) and can decrease performance (Masicampo & Baumeister, 2011). In addition, perhaps most concerning, studies conducted with employees over weekends have shown associations between unfinished tasks and negative work-related thoughts (affective rumination) (Syrek & Antoni, 2014). This suggests that leaving tasks at work that are unfinished may increase your work-related thoughts and impact your ability to detach from work and subsequently lead to negative outcomes.

New research

There is growing interest in the role of recovery from work during non-work time and associated well-being impacts. More recent research has investigated the impact of our work-related thoughts and how many unfinished tasks we have on how we feel both physiologically and psychologically. The current study’s aim was to contribute to this emerging area of research by exploring the impact of unfinished tasks and work-related thoughts during non-work time on positive and negative affect, a distinct measure of well-being that covered depression, anxiety, comfort, and enthusiasm.

The main findings showed that:

• Negative thoughts about work during non-work time (affective rumination) predicted increases in anxiety and depression and decreases in comfort and enthusiasm.
• Positive thoughts about work during non-work time (problem-solving pondering) predicted increases in enthusiasm and did not predict negative outcomes.
• Having more unfinished tasks predicted experiencing more positive thoughts about work during non-work time (problem-solving pondering) but did not predict negative thoughts (affective rumination).
• Affective rumination completely mediated the unfinished tasks and anxiety and depression relationships. This means that these negative thoughts about work act as a complete mechanism through which unfinished tasks lead to negative affective well-being outcomes.

What are the implications for both employees and organisations?

The relationship between having a higher number of unfinished tasks and the likelihood of negative thoughts about work during non-work time suggests that planning interventions whereby employees can manage their unfinished tasks and help to self-regulate could be useful. As an organisation, you may want to encourage employees to plan their tasks prior to their weekend or when they go on vacation which could help to reduce the impact on their well-being.

In addition, the results suggest that blanket measures that prevent employees from contacting employees outside of working hours may in fact be more detrimental to well-being. Encouraging an individualised approach and equipping employees with the tools to manage their workload and tasks that may be unfinished appears a better approach whilst keeping self-care in mind throughout. 

Looking ahead to the future

The results revealed from this study further contribute to the growing understanding of the impact of both unfinished tasks when we leave work and our thoughts about work during on non-work time and the impact this can have on well-being. With the growing prevalence of work-related health issues, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s important for both organisations and employees themselves to understand how to manage their workload and recover effectively during their non-work time. It is a collective responsibility to ensure maximum performance and appropriately managed well-being to contribute to a thriving and growing workplace and wider economy. Future research exploring the multiple facets involved in this process across a range of employee well-being outcomes is required to understand this further.

References

Bakker, A., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal Of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273-285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056

Fritz, C., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). Recovery, well-being, and performance-related outcomes: The role of workload and vacation experiences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 936-945. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.936

Health and Safety Executive. (2022). Health and safety at work annual report. https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overall/hssh2122.pdf

Jimenez, W. P., Hu, X., & Xu, X. V. (2022). Thinking about thinking about work: A meta-analysis of off-job positive and negative work-related thoughts. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37, 237–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-021-09742-7

Masicampo, E. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2011). Consider it done! Plan making can eliminate the cognitive effects of unfulfilled goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 667–683. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024192

Meijman, T. F., & Mulder, G. (1998). Psychological aspects of workload. In P. J. Drenth, H. Thierry, & C. J. de Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology (pp. 5-33). Hove: Psychology Press.

Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The recovery experience questionnaire: Development and validation of a measure assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 204-221. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.204

Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2015). Recovery from job stress: The stressor-detachment model as an integrative framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 72-103.https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1924

Sonnentag, S., & Niessen, C. (2020). To detach or not to detach? Two experimental studies on the affective consequences of detaching from work during non-work time. Frontiers in Psychology, 2502, 365-386. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.560156

Syrek, C. J., & Antoni, C. H. (2014). Unfinished tasks foster rumination and impair sleeping – particularly if leaders have high performance expectations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(4), 490–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037127

By Sarah Abraham (21-22)

Living in a post-Covid world has meant significant changes in the workplace, meaning that more and more employees are spending their working hours at home. However, how engaged can you truly be with your company and work if you never see the inside of the office or have any face-to-face meetings with your colleagues?

A new study aimed to understand how different work locations, such as onsite, hybrid, or remote, impact employee behaviour and how employers can ensure their teams feel engaged, even if they are not working fully from the office.

During the pandemic, over 3.4 billion people in 84 countries were forced to work from home^[1] as it was the only way for organisations to function. At the height of the pandemic, severe issues affected both management and employees worldwide, such as financial loss and job insecurity, social isolation, a decline in well-being and mental health and a decrease in WE. Interestingly, research has suggested that engagement has stagnated since the pandemic, costing the world $7.8 trillion in lost productivity, equal to 11% of the global Gross Domestic Product[2].

WE is a motivational construct, defined as a state of mind where employees feel enthusiastic and vigorous about their work. Research around this area is commonly grounded in the Job-Demands Resources model^[3] (JD-R), which proposes that organisations can cultivate WE through characteristics divided into resources and demands. Job resources, such as autonomy, feedback, social support, and psychosocial safety climate, are associated with higher WE and well-being^[4]. This study focused on perceived supervisor support, which is an employee’s belief that they are valued by their supervisors^[5]. According to the JD-R model, an employee’s supervisor is a crucial job resource as the relationship provides social support, feedback for growth, achievement of goals, and even coaching^[6]. Psychological safety, another job resource, which refers to the belief that an individual can express themself without fear of consequence, was additionally assessed as it is a fundamental enabler of learning behaviours in work settings^[7].

How the research was conducted

To gain some answers, an online survey was undertaken amongst full-time workers over the age of 18, who had been in their role for at least 3 to 6 months. These respondents were recruited from personal networks and online platforms such as Facebook and LinkedIn. They were asked to complete questionnaires on their WE and location, their perceptions of supervisor support and whether they felt psychologically safe within their organisation. Some examples of questions asked include “I am enthusiastic about my job” and “It is safe to take a risk in this organisation”, where they were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement.

The outcomes of the study

One of the study’s main findings was to discover that onsite employees had higher WE than those who worked remotely. However, hybrid employees did not show higher engagement than those who work remotely, suggesting that onsite workers have the highest levels of engagement. The results also revealed that psychological safety and WE are closely correlated, regardless of working location. The same results apply to supervisor support and WE as they were positively related.

The reason remote employees are less engaged than their onsite counterparts may be due to some negative factors that can affect employees working from home^[8]. These factors include:

• Social isolation.
• Difficulties in knowledge sharing.
• Work-home conflict.
• Supervisors having less control which can lead to difficulties within teams.

Similarly, there are potential reasons why hybrid workers have equal levels of lower engagement, such as difficulties in adapting to a changing work environment or difficulties in communicating with colleagues and line managers^[9].

What can organisations understand from this study?

The good news is that employers and employees can use the results of the study as a way of ensuring better levels of engagement for those who work remotely or hybrid. Some ideas have been suggested, such as:

• Ensuring that supervisors have the skills to support their workers, even if they are not in the office, particularly through coaching or training sessions.
• Understanding what makes a work environment psychologically safe and then implementing any necessary changes.
• Cultivating an inclusive workplace for all, regardless of work location.
• Implementing a complete human resource management system so that policies and practices are readily available and easy to understand.
• Continual training and development opportunities for employees.
• Ensuring communication is clear and transparent, particularly if it is online, as misunderstandings are harder to resolve remotely.
• Making sure that supervisors are easy to reach through working platforms such as LinkedIn and Slack, and that employees are encouraged to use these ways of contacting colleagues.

There is no doubt that the workplace is constantly evolving, and supervisors will continue to be an important resource in keeping employees engaged, not matter their work location. Hybrid and remote working seem to be the new normal, and although some companies are insisting on a full return to the office, these are few and far between. More employees are seeking companies that adopt a flexible working policy, and if implemented with the correct policies and strategies, it could also benefit organisations.  It will also be interesting to track these behaviours as the working world evolves, particularly as the Generation Z start to move up through the workforce, as they are already experiencing a different working environment.

Final thoughts

To summarise, the study provided a snapshot of attitudes into the relationship between WE and different work locations after the great shift of the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings are incredibly useful for employers and supervisors to ensure that they are providing necessary support to their employees in order for them to feel as engaged as possible, even if they are not working onsite. The importance of psychological safety and supervisor support cannot be neglected, as it is clear that both are drivers in engagement, no matter where the employee is working from.

---

[1] Bouziri, H., Smith, D., Descatha, A., Dab, W., & Jean, K. (2020). Working from home in the time of COVID-19: how to best preserve occupational health?. Occupational And Environmental Medicine, 77(7), 509-510. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020106599

[2] Gallup (2022) State of the Global Workplace: 2022 Report. State of the Global Workplace Report – Gallup

[3] Bakker, A., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands‐Resources model: state of the art. Journal Of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

[4] Crawford, E., LePine, J., & Rich, B. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834-848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364

[5] Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I., & Rhoades, L. (2002).               Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 565-573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.565

[6] Schaufeli, W.B.; Taris, T.W. A Critical Review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for Improving Work and Health. In Bridging Occupational, Organizational and Public Health: A Transdisciplinary Approach; Bauer, G.F., Hämmig, O., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; (pp. 43–68). ISBN 97894-007-5640-3. 

[7] Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work                 Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

[8] Lippe, T., & Lippényi, Z. (2019). Co‐workers working from home and individual and team performance. New Technology, Work And Employment, 35(1), 60-79. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12153

[9] Saatçi, B., Rädle, R., Rintel, S., O’Hara, K., Nylandsted Klokmose, C. (2019). Hybrid Meetings in the Modern Workplace: Stories of Success and Failure. In: Nakanishi, H., Egi, H., Chounta, IA., Takada, H., Ichimura, S., Hoppe, U. (eds) Collaboration Technologies and Social Computing. CRIWG+CollabTech 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11677. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28011-6_4

By Uneeba Khan (21-22)

What does burnout mean to you?

Burnout is a concept that was first invented and presented by, Freudenberg (1974),  A research initiated in a clinical setting based of what the father of the term burnout observed. Through the years researchers such Maslach (1982) developed the concept further, eventually proposing it as a mental reaction with three outcomes: emotion exhaustion, disassociation and removed strive to accomplishment. However, the current literature only focuses on those that come organisational settings with linked hierarchy. What is also known is that burnout research is commonly associated with the clinical sector or more ideally sectors where customer service is at the heart of the job role (Singh et al, 1994). However, burnout syndrome can be experienced by anyone for instance, those who are self-employed can find themselves at the risk of burnout with stats going up to 88% incorporating no detachment from work and prohibiting recovery.  With much of the literature being conducted years the faces changed by the society now need to be considered (Weber & Jaekel-Reinhard, 2002). Nevertheless, it is a phenomenon that has much left to be understood and as research aims to explore what is burnout or how it occurs, this collated data needs to be exposed to various industries so work can be done to avoid it.  As mentioned, a greater awareness for those in self-employed sector.

Multidimensional: Burnout vs Personality

To place reason burnout as causation of external pressures would be limiting to the exploration of the idea. Shirom (2003) divided burnout across three levels: organisational, occupational and individual. When exploring the individual it seems applaudable to acknowledge the innate make up. Personality an idea brought about by Goldberg (1990) the five division of personality are defined by  vulnerabilities and characteristics. The idea has been developed to allow an understanding of how people with different personalities interact with factors and personalise interaction with others and the environment. 

New Research

A recent study on the topic of burnout acquires a qualitative approach to draw upon individual characteristics and burnout (Khan, 2022). Alongside this the researcher also recruits participants from a sector understudied. The chosen sample was made up of a personal trainer who was self-employed in addition to having contracted hours with commercial gyms. Through the use of semi structured interviews, the participants had the chance to define what burnout meant to them to what their interaction with it looked like this encapsulated their individuality in a topic otherwise presented as number. 

Figure 1: Factors across which individuality influenced how burnout was perceived and received

What did they find?

As visible in Figure 1, post analysis, the researcher presented three dominate themes that represent factors where individual characteristics varied and participants spoke of similar themes yet different ideas. These themes included: Personal definition of burnout, Self-lead stress and personal work ethic. To elaborate these themes were then each theme divided into sub-themes which explains the various factors in good details.

It is obvious that personal training requires the professionals to interact with a wide range of individuals in order to build a client base however much of these regular interaction accumulate to an added stress. Many PTs expressed the nature of these interactions were more than a time for them to train the client but a lot more of emotional involvement took place. Participants used terms such ‘therapist’ and ‘borderline best friend’ were used to explain what this emotional association felt like. As not all were fond of this one, needing to be social day in, day out a result was a extreme emotional exhaustion.

Many of the personal trainers recruited held a role within the gym setting whether this was senior or not varied. However all expressed a level of disassociation with the role they had for the gym compared to their own business as PT. Contrarily, their business over which they had control they expressed how often they would find themselves overriding their schedules to do  what needed to be done. Their goal for this was to develop their business to a higher status than it currently was. This habit led them to go beyond the schedule or plan in too much more than manageable. This habit was not illustrated by all but those who had high aspirations for their business. Khan’s (2022) research resulted in a large body of data and hence many apparent patterns accumulated the following were chosen, to add means to the question being researched.  

To explore this further some personal trainers even expressed their acceptance to the idea of burnout as an inevitable part of the process and that its occurrence was a matter fact and just a point to recover and then get back to work.

Much of the participants demonstrated a high level of self-awareness whereby they expressed how they were aware of where the risk of their burnout may come from and yet they had already experienced burnout instead of attempting to avoid it. What needs to be considered though, is that not all who state having encountered burnout came with an internal reason. Factors such as economic and finance were at play and a reason to work harder than they desired.

Out of the 10 participants only one had experienced burnout to the level of adversity whereby they concluded with their decision to leave the industry. One PT did not feel a supreme attachment to their role as this job was not their desired long-term role. Khan’s (2022) research is useful as it provides a deeper insight into the ideas purposed in the quantitative literature with good explanation.

Looking ahead

Khan (2022) presents potential take aways of this research and how the findings can be incorporated into real life settings. Advise around considerations for future research are also stated with a systematic discussion of how their biases interacted with the research. Though issues correlating to mental health are rarely intentional, the environmental and individualistic factors need to be holistically viewed so when interventions are considered, they fit those affected with burnout.     

By Oriana Cavenagh (21-22)

Would you like to have high-quality relationships with your employees? Do you want to increase work engagement and innovation? Would you like your employees to feel empowered? If so, you need to foster both psychological safety and diversity and inclusion to promote voice at work. According to research by Forbes (2019), employees who feel their voices are heard are “4.6 times more likely to produce their best work” (Beheshti, 2019, p.2).

In fact, Google conducted a study that researched what made a team effective and assessed the dynamics that their top-performing teams shared (Rozovsky, 2015). The most important factor for a team performance that came out of that finding was not structure or dependability. Instead, it was whether psychological safety was present within the team.

Figure 1. Employee Voice (Perceptyx, 2021)

Psychological Safety is “a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking” (Edmondson, 1999, p. 350). This team belief is one where everyone can speak their mind freely and can make mistakes with the knowledge that it won’t lead to negative consequences. It is where no one feels excluded, intimidated, or vulnerable and permits an environment, where the employee can bring up ideas or concerns without fear.

Diversity and Inclusion within an organizational context refer to acknowledging differences and recognizing the advantage of having a range of perspectives in decision-making (Lutfur & Green, 2022). As studies have shown that inclusion doesn’t necessarily follow diversity, it is therefore vital for organizations to help create an inclusive work culture (Edmondson, 2018; Ashikali, Groeneveld & Kuipers, 2021; O’Donovan, 2018).

So, why do you need psychological safety and D&I for voice?

Psychological safety helps unlocks the benefits of diversity through promoting inclusion and creating a “safe” environment for these diverse perspectives to be heard without fear. To understand psychological safety, one needs to understand diversity and inclusion. Research has demonstrated that psychological safety and inclusion can both help explain why employers share information, speak up and exchange with each other (Collins & Smith, 2006; Liang, Farh & Farh, 2012; Gong et al.,2012). Speaking up at work requires a certain level of uncertainty as to whether what they are going to say is justified or valuable. This level of uncertainty is often coupled with a fear of negative consequences if one spoke up. Therefore, it is important, that the employee who is voicing, feels included and psychologically safe enough to speak up. If employees do not feel included or psychologically safe, then they might not voice their opinion or ideas and hence this could hinder their own performance and an organization’s performance.

How does this link with my study?

By looking at the relationship between psychological safety and diversity and inclusion, my study aimed to see what mechanisms and behaviours leaders and managers use to promote employee voice.

This study was conducted by interviewing fifteen individuals who were either managers or leaders from different organizations and teams. Some managed large corporate organizations while others managed smaller businesses.

What did I find?

Based on my findings from the participants interviews, I discovered how interlinked the concepts of psychological safety and diversity and inclusion, through being encouraged by the same behaviours and mechanisms. These are: effective communication, vulnerability and mutual respect (as shown in figure 2).

Figure 2: How to foster both psychological safety and D&I

These three mechanisms can help increase voice at work through encouraging, empowering and creating the spaces for different perspectives and ides to be heard. Fostering psychological safety and D&I reduces the negative consequences of speaking up whilst helping promote a sense of belonging. Regarding the intertwined relationship, the study’s findings conveys that when one wants to understand and encourage psychological safety, one should also understand diversity and inclusion, since they can be driven by the same mechanisms. One cannot feel included without feeling psychologically safe and vice versa.

How to make use of these findings?

Below, are some practical recommendations that you can start applying within your team or organisation.

1. Start engaging with your employee from the beginning (after hiring). Mangers and HR directors need to understand that especially with diverse employees, hiring is not the finish line for unlocking the benefits of diversity. Having a diverse team does not mean that it is inclusive nor psychologically safe. Therefore, the importance of fostering an inclusive and psychological safe environment is crucial for gaining the advantages of diversity.

            Therefore, managers or directors should: 

• Have an Open-door policy to help show that you (leader) are available
• Mentoring or buddying up new employee to help make employee feel more included
• Share company values and expectations to help reduce miscommunication with knowing what they are signing up for

• Invite participation through communicating consistently and creating opportunities for voice will help employees feel comfortable enough to speak up without fear in spaces that are designed for that exact reason. Via this space, employees might voice up questions and ideas that they might have not done so if this space was never created.

            To encourage voice, leaders or managers should:

• Facilitate communication training strategies to help learn new skills and improve current communication
• Frame meetings as an occasion to learn with having no agenda or evaluation. This would help diverse perspectives and those who may not speak usually to speak up without judgement.

• Listen, instead of assuming. This skill is highly crucial for leaders and managers to utilize for their advantage as well as for their employee’s advantage. By actively listening, you are helping promote voice by showing that you have genuine intent of care for what that employee or employees are saying. Instead of interrupting them after the first sentence or being distracted by something else when they are talking. By not assuming, you are not placing that employee into a certain box which helps discourage poor relationships between manager and employee based on these assumptions.

To do this, leaders and managers should:

• Ask lots of questions instead of expressing your own views    
• Adopt the double loop learning technique and to help overcome assumptions (Argyris, 1991)             
• Listen with a giving attitude that encourages voice
• Use the ladder of inference model to help show the power of one’s own unconscious bias (Argyris, 1987)

I would like you to take from this study the importance of allowing all to be given a chance to be heard at work. Every employee has been hired for a reason, this being a positive one. Therefore, leaders or managers should harness this potential for a higher chance of organisational success and happier employees.

References for Blog

Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard business review, 69(3), 38-50

Argyris, C. (1982). The executive mind and double-loop learning. Organizational dynamics, 11(2), 5-22.

Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2021). The role of inclusive leadership in supporting an inclusive climate in diverse public sector teams. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 41(3), 497-519.

Beheshti, N (2019) 10 Timely Statistics About The Connection Between Employee Engagement And Wellness. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nazbeheshti/2019/01/16/10-timely-statistics-about-the-connection-between-employee-engagement-and-wellness/?sh=41fe251e22a0

Collins, C., & Smith, K. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: The role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of management journal, 49(3), 544-560.

Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. 

Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–38

Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth.  New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Gong, Y., Cheung, S. Y., Wang, M., & Huang, J. C. (2012). Unfolding the proactive process for creativity: Integration of the employee proactivity, information exchange, and psychological safety perspectives. Journal of management, 38(5), 1611-1633.

Liang, J., Farh, C. I., & Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92.

Lutfur, A., & Green, M. (2022). Inclusion and diversity in the workplace. CIPD. https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/diversity/factsheet#gref 

O’Donovan, D. (2018). Diversity and inclusion in the workplace. In C. Machado & J. Davim (Eds.), Organizational Behaviour and Human Resource Management. Cham: Springer

Perceptyx (2021). Employee Voice: What Is It & Why Does It Matter? | Perceptyx[Online Image]. https://blog.perceptyx.com/employee-voice

Rozovsky, J. (2015, November 17). The Five Keys to a Successful Google Team. re:Work. 

Retrieved from: https://rework.withgoogle.com

By Sophia Blaes (21-22)

The media is calling it the “great resignation”: talent is hard to find and even harder to keep, and job-to-job moves are at a record high [1]. Staff turnover means loss of organisational memory and skilled workers which negatively affects morale and productivity amongst the remaining employees, recruitment is costly and resource intensive, and all of this is having a detrimental effect on organisations’ financial performance [2, 3, 4, 5]. Whilst job changes will always be inevitable, some voluntary turnover may be avoidable. So, what can organisations do to reduce their attrition rates and invest in retention?

Firstly, we need to understand what influences an employee’s decision to leave their organisation. Leadership, culture and organisational design have often been considered as drivers, but this disregards the role the individual plays in all of this. Employees have an innate desire to fit in, and ambition for control and autonomy in their work [6], so naturally they seek organisations where they feel empowered to realise these. The psychological attraction-selection-attrition theory [7] suggests that when an employee and an organisation share a mutual attraction, they will select each other, and continue to do so until the fit is no longer right. A good fit is considered a valuable resource, which employees are motivated to protect [8], making them more willing to invest in their work and become engaged [9]. Highly engaged workers also feel a sense of responsibility and identification with their organisation [10], meaning they’re less likely to leave. Work engagement is a positive state of mind and is defined as vigour (e.g., energetic, resilient), dedication (e.g., involved, enthusiastic) and absorption (e.g., concentrated, engrossed), exactly what organisations want from their employees in order to perform competitively. However, to be fully engaged, psychological safety and meaningfulness are necessary conditions [11]. You start to see how it’s all interlinked, but how can we measure this fit and take value from it?

Fit can take many different forms, but most importantly here, it’s referring to person-organisation fit, person-job fit, PO and PJ fit for short. PO fit assesses the compatibility of someone’s personal values and those of the organisational culture, whereas PJ fit is split into two dimensions: demands-abilities and needs-supplies. They look at the congruence of an employee’s knowledge and skills with the demands of their job, and whether their needs, desires and preferences are met by the job [12, 13, 14]. It’s thought that these types of fit influence each other. For example, high performers who have good demands-abilities fit may have more alternative job opportunities, so when PO fit is low, they are more likely to leave their organisation, whereas if it’s the other way around and PO fit is high, but demands-abilities fit is low, employees would still think of their organisation as positively despite being incompatible with the job and therefore more inclined to stay. Yet there is surprisingly little research to explore this interaction further, and even less so to understand how it relates to engagement and turnover alike.

To bridge this gap, this study aimed to evaluate the relationship between PO fit and turnover intention and the impact engagement and PJ fit have on this.

The study

To explore this relationship, UK employees completed an online survey which measured their perceived PO and PJ fit, work engagement and turnover intention. Participants were recruited on social media platforms and through personal or professional contacts. The responses of 105 participants were analysed in this research.

The analyses showed that PO fit predicted turnover intention and that this relationship could be partially explained through work engagement, but PJ fit was not found to play a role in this. However, this should be interpreted with caution as non-significance does not disprove an effect, nor does significance prove anything with absolute certainty. More likely, it shows how complex their relationships are, especially because the study did find that all of the concepts are significantly related to each other, we just don’t quite know how yet and there are a number of reasons for that. Given we’re all different, we probably all place more or less importance on a specific type of fit, and this can be influenced by things like our personality, the people we surround ourselves with or the country and culture we have grown up in. Still, these findings pose valuable implications to carry forward into everyday organisational life, because organisations that fail to understand fit from an individual’s standpoint risk compromising their ability to generate an engaged workforce and ultimately will continue to lose skilled employees.

What can organisation do?

1. Be clear about your organisational culture, values and expectations from the offset. This can be done through internal communications, executive presentations or the provision of training. Implement this as early as the recruitment stage and into your selection tools to make sure you hire candidates that match your work environment, but also so that candidates know what they’re getting themselves into.
2. Work with your employees to develop positive psychological states at work so they can take meaning from it. Encourage familiarity with HR practices and available resources, support and benefits.
3. Drill down into what drives your employees. You could implement something like an ‘engagement appraisal’ which is separate from performance conversations to gain a deep understanding of their motivations and what you can do to support them from an organisational level.

References

[1] ONS. (2022). X02: Labour Force Survey Flows estimates. https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/labourforcesurveyflowsestimatesx02

[2] Heavey, A. L., Holwerda, J. A., & Hausknecht, J. P. (2013). Causes and consequences of collective turnover: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 412–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032380

[3] Oxford Economics. (2014). The Cost of Brain Drain. https://www.oxfordeconomics.com/resource/the-cost-of-brain-drain/

[4] Park, T.-Y., & Shaw, J. D. (2013). Turnover rates and organizational performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 268–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030723

[5] Shaw, J. D., Duffy, M. K., Johnson, J. L., & Lockhart, D. E. (2005). Turnover, social capital losses, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 594–606. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.17843940

[6] Yu, K. Y. T. (2013). A motivational model of person-environment fit: psychological motives as drivers of change. In A. L. Kristof-Brown & J. Billsberry (Eds.), Organizational Fit: Key Issues and New Directions (pp. 21–49). Wiley-Blackwell.

[7] Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453.

[8] Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and Psychological Resources and Adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6(4), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.6.4.307

[9] Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364

[10] Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Karatepe, O. M. (2017). Work engagement and turnover intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(6), 1580–1598. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2015-0649

[11] Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work. The Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.

[12] Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875–884. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.875

[13] Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organisation fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49.

[14] Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organisation, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.

By Eliza Wong (21-22)

The Bamboo Ceiling, derived from the “glass ceiling”, describes an organisational barrier that impedes ambitious Asian professionals from reaching executive positions in the workplace (Hyun, 2005). Previous research on the Bamboo Ceiling has informed that Asians are disproportionately underrepresented in the US, as explained by the cultural differences and ‘model minority’ myth.

What is the evidence? 

Asians comprise 13% of the professional workforce yet only 5.6% of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) in the Fortune 500 (Zewigenhaft, 2021). Similarly, Asians contributed 7.5% of the workforce in the UK, however, only 3.3% of FTSE 100 chairs, CEOs and CFOs are from an ethnic minority background, of which none were ethnic Chinese or Asians (Telegraph, 2015).

On the surface, Asians have achieved relative success in educational, socio-economic, and professional status compared to other minorities. Although Asian Americans are most likely to be hired in entry-level and nonmanagerial roles in companies in Silicon Valley, they are half as likely as white men and white women to be promoted to senior leadership positions (Gee & Peck, 2017).

Furthermore, a recent survey of 10,000 people conducted by the management consultancy, Bain & Company, has found across all geographies (including the US, Canada, UK, and France), industries and demographic groups, Asian workers reported feeling the least included at work (Bain & Company, 2022).This finding revealed that Asian professionals in western societies don’t feel included in the workplace which provided evidence of the Bamboo Ceiling phenomenon.

More recently, emerging evidence has suggested that the Bamboo Ceiling phenomenon is not an issue for all Asians, but a cultural issue of assertiveness that is exclusive to East Asians (EAs) (Lu et al., 2020). Furthermore, the researchers conducted a systematic review and concluded these findings showed that EAs are consistently underrepresented in leadership roles but not SAs. Moreover, they noted that there is a scarcity of EA CEOs in the US whilst there are plenty of SA CEOs from well-known companies such as Citigroup, Google, Microsoft, MasterCard and PepsiCo.

Why are Asians not in leadership positions?

The fundamental principle of Implicit leadership theory (ILT) is that leadership is a socially contract process and it operates within constraints offered by its followers as they determine the definition of a leader and what a leader should be (Lord et al., 1984).

When group members identified a potential leader, their implicit expectations and assumptions about personal characteristics, traits, and qualities in a leader are activated and subconsciously they compared the perceived qualities of the potential leader to the prototypical leader attributes in their ILT (Kono et al, 2012). As a result, an individual is less likely to attain a leadership position if they don’t meet the leader schema i.e., there is incongruence between their characteristics and the cultural prototype of a leader, hence group members won’t be categorised as leaders albeit the individual is motivated to be a leader (House, Javidan & Hanges, 2002).

According to Social identity theory (SIT), a group is shaped by a collection of people who identified themselves with the same social category and the group’s social identity attributes to define and evaluate themselves in which these attributes capture and accentuates intragroup similarities and intergroup differences (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). Moreover, SIT viewed that out-groups are always perceived as being more homogeneous than in-groups and this potentially accounts for the scarcity of Asians at the upper levels of organizations.

New research:

A new qualitative study aims to examine the experience of Asian professionals’ career progression and unearth the barriers of the “bamboo ceiling” in the U.K (Wong, 2022). Comprehensive semi-structured interviews with 12 Asian professionals from China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore as well as second-generation British-born East and South Asians were conducted.

What are the results?

Across different white-collar industries in the UK, Asian professionals are hindered by various individual, cultural, and structural hindrances when reaching a leadership role. These disadvantages and challenges were often perceived by themselves and others as products of cultural differences and language barriers. Moreover, their careers were also hindered by stereotypes and organisational barriers at work. The four prominent themes include ‘Culture assimilation’, ‘Language and communication mastery and ‘Asians as good workers, not leaders’ and ‘Organisational barriers’. The themes and subthemes are shown in figure 1.

How can organisations address Bamboo Ceiling in the U.K.?

Firstly, organisations should be mindful of the cultural differences in processes such as performance management, promotion, and recruitment. This is especially important in creating a more equitable and inclusive environment.

Secondly, organisations can consider providing theory-based, cross-cultural training interventions such as cultural assimilator (CA), relational ideology (RI) and unconscious bias training to the workforce. Therefore, managers can identify and understand the cultural differences and can provide strategic support and appropriate tasks for Asians to stretch and improve skills in certain areas, for example, developing their presentation skills. In addition, organisations should evolve their implicit prototype of leadership to match a diversifying workforce and recognise the benefits of having more than one successful leadership style.

Furthermore, instead of lumping Asians into the BAME category, it is necessary that they are identified separately from other minority groups. The formal recognition of the Asian community would aid to create a sense of belonging and inclusion. If possible, companies should review the diversity and inclusion policy in the annual hiring and promotion target so Asians can become more well-represented in all levels of the hierarchy and different departments.

Another idea is to organise a series of firm-wide cultural events on an annual basis, that promotes Asian culture to the company, such as Chinese New Year and Mid-Autumn Festival; similar to the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) heritage month, Black History Month and Pride. Furthermore, organisations can consider setting up a mentorship programme that pairs junior Asian employees with senior Asian employees.

At an individual level, Asians might benefit from increased awareness of the differences in the Implicit Leadership Theory cultural dimension and their communication styles such as the inclination to self-effacement, harmony, and non-assertiveness. Moreover, diversifying their social networks at work may enhance their objective leadership emergence (Lu, 2022).   

Conclusion

The Bamboo Ceiling is not the culpability of Asians. As diversity is one of the most important initiatives in companies’ agendas, organisations should depart from the ‘traditional melting pot’ approach in which fusing ethnic minorities into the mainstream at the expense of their cultural identities. Instead, they should recognise and value cultural differences among ethnic groups.

Reference

Anderson, E. (2015). Ethnic diversity among FTSE 100 chiefs nosedives. United Kingdom: Retrieved from The Telegraph. website: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/ftse100/11690229/Ethnic-diversity-among-FTSE-100-chiefs-nose-dives.html

Gee, B. P. D. W. J. (2015). HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT: Asian American Leaders in Silicon Valley.

House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4

Hyun, J. (2005). Breaking the bamboo ceiling: Career strategies for Asians. HarperBusiness

Kono, T., Ehrhart, K. H., Ehrhart, M. G., & Schultze, T. (2012). Implicit leadership theories in Japan and the US. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(3), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7941.2012.00026.x

Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & de Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34(3), 343–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90043-6

Lu, J. G. (2022). A social network perspective on the Bamboo Ceiling: Ethnic homophily explains why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership in multiethnic environments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(6), 959–982. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000292

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Political psychology (pp. 276-293). Psychology Press.

Venkataraman, K., & Yee, P. (2022). Greater Inclusion Can Help Asian Americans Crack the Bamboo Ceiling. United States: Retrieved from Bain & Company. website: https://www.bain.com/insights/greater-inclusion-can-help-asian-americans-crack-the-bamboo-ceiling/

Zweigenhaft, R. (2022). Maximizing Corporate Profits or Doing the Right Thing? White Male Fortune 500 CEOs, New CEOs, the Ukraine Morality Test, and the Right to Abortion.