Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
IntroductionThis article reviews the discussion concerning hybrid work (HW) during and after the pandemic. We argue that understanding hybrid work as simply dividing working time between an oce and another location limits the potential of organizing work sustainably based on organizations' goals and employee needs. Understanding the core nature of hybridity as a flexible and systemic entity and a “combination of two or more things” impacting work outcomes such as wellbeing and performance opens a much richer view of organizing work now and in the future. The critical questions are: What is the core nature of hybridity when two or more things are combined in work, and what factors influence configuring them? Moreover, what are their potential wellbeing and performance outcomes?MethodsTo discover core elements, we reviewed how the HW concept was defined in consulting companies' publications, business journals, and international organizations' publications, mainly focusing on challenges and opportunities for hybrid work during COVID-19. We also analyzed how the concept was used in European questionnaire findings from 27 EU countries during the pandemic. The potential wellbeing and performance outcomes were studied using a sample of prior literature reviews on remote and telework. To identify “Two or more things” in the discussions, we broke down the HW concepts into the physical, virtual, social, and temporal work elements and their sub-elements and designable features.ResultsWe found that the concepts used in the discussions on hybrid work reflect traditional views of remote and telework as a combination of working at home and in the office.DiscussionWe suggest configuring hybrid work as a flexible entity, which opens a perspective to design and implement diverse types of hybrid work that are much more prosperous and sustainable than just combining onsite and offsite work. The expected wellbeing and performance outcomes can be controversial due to the misfit of the hybrid work elements with the organizational purpose, employee needs and expectations, and non-observed contextual factors in implementations.
IntroductionThis article reviews the discussion concerning hybrid work (HW) during and after the pandemic. We argue that understanding hybrid work as simply dividing working time between an oce and another location limits the potential of organizing work sustainably based on organizations' goals and employee needs. Understanding the core nature of hybridity as a flexible and systemic entity and a “combination of two or more things” impacting work outcomes such as wellbeing and performance opens a much richer view of organizing work now and in the future. The critical questions are: What is the core nature of hybridity when two or more things are combined in work, and what factors influence configuring them? Moreover, what are their potential wellbeing and performance outcomes?MethodsTo discover core elements, we reviewed how the HW concept was defined in consulting companies' publications, business journals, and international organizations' publications, mainly focusing on challenges and opportunities for hybrid work during COVID-19. We also analyzed how the concept was used in European questionnaire findings from 27 EU countries during the pandemic. The potential wellbeing and performance outcomes were studied using a sample of prior literature reviews on remote and telework. To identify “Two or more things” in the discussions, we broke down the HW concepts into the physical, virtual, social, and temporal work elements and their sub-elements and designable features.ResultsWe found that the concepts used in the discussions on hybrid work reflect traditional views of remote and telework as a combination of working at home and in the office.DiscussionWe suggest configuring hybrid work as a flexible entity, which opens a perspective to design and implement diverse types of hybrid work that are much more prosperous and sustainable than just combining onsite and offsite work. The expected wellbeing and performance outcomes can be controversial due to the misfit of the hybrid work elements with the organizational purpose, employee needs and expectations, and non-observed contextual factors in implementations.
Accessible design within the built environment has often focused on mobility conditions and has recently widened to include mental health. Additionally, as one in seven are neurodivergent (including conditions such as ADHD, autism, dyslexia, and dyspraxia), this highlights a growing need for designing for ‘non-visible’ conditions in addition to mobility. Emphasised by the growing disability pay gap and the disability perception gap, people with disabilities are still facing discrimination and physical barriers within the workplace. This research aimed to identify key ways of reducing physical barriers faced by people with a disability and thus encourage more comfortable and productive use of workspaces for all. Once the need for designing for a spectrum of users and inclusive workspace design was understood, a survey was then circulated to students and staff at a large university in the UK (working remotely from home), with the aim of understanding how people have adapted their home spaces and what barriers they continue to face. Quantitative and qualitative results were compared to the literature read with key issues emerging, such as separating work and rest from spaces in bedrooms. The survey findings and literature were evaluated, extracting key performance-based goals (e.g., productivity and focus within a study space) and prescriptive design features (e.g., lighting, furniture, and thermal comfort), whilst also considering the inclusivity of these features. The key conclusion establishes that, to achieve maximum benefit, it is important to work with the users to understand specific needs and identify creative and inclusive solutions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.