The organizational implications of human resources managers’ perception of teleworking

Abstract

Human resource managers are prime decision-makers in the adoption of teleworking. This paper shows the results of an empirical study of the perceptions of HR managers about the feasibility of teleworking within their organizations. Teleworking feasibility is significantly explained by the percentage of tasks suitable to teleworking, the employees' involvement in task design and programming, the percentage of salespeople in the workforce, the degree of work-location sharing for teleworking, the use of information and communication technologies, and the degree of innovation. HR managers in small companies perceive a greater feasibility than HR managers in large companies.

Institutional explanations for managers’ attitudes towards telehomeworking

“…In the international telework debate, telework is often considered to improve performance and productivity (Frolick et al, 1993;Kossek et al, 2006;McCloskey and Igbaria, 2003). According to the results of Pérez-Pérez et al (2003), HR managers consider productivity increase to be the most important benefit for the company.…”

“…In most cases, the questionnaire was filled in by the senior HR manager, or by (one of) the CEOs of the company. As it is often senior management that is in the position to adopt a formal telework policy (Pérez-Pérez et al, 2003), the analyses presented in this study are based on data provided by 380 senior HR managers (79.8%) and 96 top managers, the latter also being referred to in this study as CEOs (20.2%) (N = 476). Owing to missing values on our dependent variables (managers' attitudes towards teleworking), the analysis in the present study was confined to 444 cases.…”

“…A higher score on the calculated variable 'flexible culture' reflects a more flexible organization culture. In addition, the analyses were also controlled for the so-called 'technical readiness for telework' of the work activities performed by the workers in the organization (Pérez-Pérez et al, 2003). Therefore, the continuous variable '% PC-use within the organization' was used (min = 0; max = 100; mean = 57.54; SD = 31.36), as we expected teleworking to be more feasable when a higher percentage of the employees in the organization work with a personal computer.…”

“…In search of explanations for the adoption and diffusion of teleworking, scholars have emphasized the importance of 'fit' between the organizational characteristics and the attributes of this new work mode. Various fit-elements have been mentioned, such as the use of information and communication technologies in the organization (Pérez-Pérez et al, 2003; occupation, task and employee characteristics (Olson, 1983;Peters and van der Lippe, 2007), structural factors, such as formalization, centralization and specialization (Ruppel and Harrington, 1995); the competitive environment of organizations (Sia et al, 2004); the organization's corporate culture (Karnowksi and White, 2002;Peters and Batenburg, 2004;Standen, 2000) and national culture (Standen, 2000;Peters and den Dulk, 2003;Tregaskis, 2000). Currently, however, it is doubtful whether telework adoption depends solely on these types of fit-factors.…”

“…These 'occupational communities' may graft a specific set of dominant beliefs and role related social expectations onto managers that constitute the basis with which they assess new ideas and practices (Schein, 1996). As a result, institutional factors shaping managers' attitudes can be considered important in the diffusion of teleworking (Daniels et al, 2001;Pérez-Pérez et al, 2003). By analyzing how institutional pressures affect managers' attitudes towards teleworking, the present study aims to contribute to the debates on adoption and diffusion of work-life initiatives in general, and teleworking in particular.…”