![]() ![]() In this vein, to overcome those, organizations now need to develop new organizational capabilities aimed at enhancing their attention towards societal issues. Social inequalities are partly caused by habitual organizational practices. ![]() A discussion of the findings, contributions, limitations, and future directions is provided. A teleworker-friendly business model can be achieved by equipping e-leaders with competencies that will enhance employee self-efficacy and performance. The findings show that e-worker self-efficacy partially mediates the relationship between e-leadership competencies and workplace well-being and fully mediates the relationship between e-leadership competencies and job performance. Data from 269 teleworkers worldwide were analyzed using partial least squares path modeling (PLS-PM). Inspired by this need and drawing insight from social cognitive theory, this study explores the mediating role of e-work self-efficacy in the relationship between e-leadership competencies and workplace well-being and job performance. However, studies on e-leadership are in the early stages. Technologically enabled leadership, or e-leadership, is promising for the telework norm. Teleworking is a new business reality that entails adapting leadership styles to function effectively in a virtual environment. We discuss these results and their implications for organizational practices and worker well-being. In addition, the negative effect of culture of flexibility on psychological distress is stronger among workers sandwiched between preschool childcare and elder-care compared with those with neither caregiving obligations, a pattern especially pronounced among women. Work–family conflict and work–family enrichment partially mediate the relationship between culture of flexibility and psychological distress. Results show that a flexible workplace culture, but not access to flextime or flexplace, is associated with lower psychological distress. National Study of the Changing Workforce, this study (1) examines the associations between access to three types of flexible working arrangements-flextime, flexplace, and culture of flexibility-and psychological distress, (2) tests the mediating roles of work–family conflict and work–family enrichment, and (3) investigates whether these relationships differ by workers’ childcare or elder-care obligations as they intersect with gender. We offer implications for research and practice.ĭrawing on data from the 2008 U.S. Flexibility to control work location is rarely available for lower-level jobs but benefits middle and upper-level employees, provided that are able to control separation from work when desired and self-regulate complexity. Work continuity control (leaves) benefits upper and middle-level employees, but is largely unavailable to lower-level workers. Yet these same part-time practices enhance recruitment and retention for upper-level jobs, but harm promotion and pay. Part-time work permitting control over work volume/workload hurts lower-level employees the most (due to involuntary income and benefits loss). Providing employee control over scheduling variation (flextime) may benefit lower-level workers the most, yet many are unable to access this flexibility form. We find that employees across occupational groups experience different work-life flexibility outcomes from different flexibility types. We investigate the range of definitions, measurement approaches and theorizing regarding work-life flexibility. We review how occupational status and flexibility experiences vary and shape work-life inequality, which we identify as a form of job inequality. Research has under-examined how work-life flexibility is stratified across occupations. We define work-life flexibility as employment scheduling practices that are designed to give employees greater control over when, where, how much or how continuously work is done. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |