A MULTI-LEVEL SOCIO-TECHNICAL SYSTEMS TELECOMMUTING

FRAMEWORK

ABSTRACT

Telecommuting can help create organizational efficiencies and improve competitive

advantage. It has been studied from a variety of perspectives, including that of transportation,

management, psychology, and information systems. However, telecommuting literature, while

abundant and diversified, often reports contradictory results, creating dilemmas for practice and

research. Past researchers noting such conflicting findings often identify the lack of guiding

theoretical bases as a key problem. In an attempt to explain the contradictory results found in

prior research and in practice, we review telecommuting literature and expose conceptualization

issues that need to be addressed in the development of a telecommuting research model:

telecommuting as both a context and an aspect of work, as a multi-level concept, and as a time-

dependent concept. The proposed multi-level model, guided by socio-technical systems theory,

illustrates the inter-relationships of telecommuting antecedents and outcomes across levels of

analysis and over time. The research offers a number of important implications for future

research, as well as for managers involved in or affected by telecommuting in their

organizations.

Keywords: telecommuting, telework, socio-technical systems, mobile work, multilevel research

1. INTRODUCTION

Telecommuting has become more popular than ever before due to the ubiquitous

adoption of various information and communication technologies (ICT) like mobile computing

devices, wireless hotspots, broadband into homes, etc. It has been used in organizations over the

years to achieve organizational and individual benefits. Recent estimates by Gartner Dataquest

suggest that 25% of workers in the United States telecommuted in 2007 (Joli 2009). Other
statistics suggest that the number of Americans who telecommuted at least one day per month for

their employer increased from approximately 12.4 million in 2006 to 17.2 million in 2008. This

represents a 74% increase since 2005 (WorldatWork 2009). Similarly, while there were 2.2

million people telecommuting in the United Kingdom in 2003 (Smith 2004), it is estimated that

more than one third of the United Kingdom workforce of 29 million telecommuted in 2007

(Pollster_YouGov_UK 2007).

Telecommuting, in this paper, focuses on the use of ICT to replace or substitute for work

environments that require individuals to commute to a traditional office (Bélanger 1999). In line

with other reviews of research in this area (e.g., Bailey and Kurland 2002; Bélanger and Collins

1998), we use the term telecommuting interchangeably with telework, which is a term more

often used in Europe due to an initial focus on job creation as compared to a focus on

environmental concerns in the United States (Sørensen et al. 2008). We are specifically

interested in work performed away from the office by employees related to an established

organization, which includes mobile work when tied to an organizational context but not small

business owners whose place of business is only located in their home. Mobile work involves

the use of mobile devices to conduct work from a variety of locations. Telecommuting has

fundamentally changed the way organizations manage and conduct business, and how

individuals and groups interrelate to accomplish work and reach desired work outcomes

(Bélanger 1999; Pinsonneault and Boisvert 2001). Not surprisingly, then, telecommuting

impacts cannot be considered solely from the point of view of the ICT usage. Rather,

telecommuting involves complex interrelationships between telecommuting work environments,

individual motivations, management and work practices, as well as ICT use.

1
 Telecommuting growth is a result of advances in ICT, as well as organizational attempts

to increase internal efficiencies, improve competitive advantage, and respond to calls for

flexibility in work hours (Hill et al. 2010; Pearce 2009). For example, mobile technology

enables flexibility in the timing and location of work activities, and makes it easier to

accommodate work and family (Towers et al. 2006). In addition, work is becoming increasingly

global, as corporations outsource work activities or otherwise distribute interdependent activities

across far-flung locations (Kuldeep et al. 2009). Performing work in this environment means

that employees often work at home during non-traditional hours to communicate with their

distributed colleagues.

Telecommuting literature includes studies from a variety of fields, such as transportation,

management, psychology, and information systems. Because of this variety, the literature

reveals a myriad of impacts on individuals, groups, and organizations that create unique

problems for managing and facilitating telecommuting. This literature, while abundant, often

reports contradictory results, creating dilemmas for practice and future research. For example,

conflicting results are particularly evident in the effects of telecommuting on productivity. On

the one hand, telecommuting is reported to have positive impacts on productivity at the

individual, group, and organization levels through such work outcomes as increased

performance, decreased office costs, lower absenteeism, and faster response times to customers

(Bélanger and Collins 1998; Igbaria 1999; Pinsonneault and Boisvert 2001). However, at the

same time telecommuting literature reports negative productivity impacts on individuals and

groups, such as the absence of the best workers when needed, decreased individual productivity

when working at home, problems using ICT, and a loss of synergy at all levels in the

2
organization (Pinsonneault and Boisvert 2001; Ward and Shabha 2001; Watson-Manheim and

Bélanger 2002).

Potential explanations for the conflicting results include methodological limitations, in

particular the lack of theoretical bases underlying much of this research (Bailey and Kurland

2002; Bélanger and Collins 1998; McCloskey and Igbaria 1998). While a few attempts have

been made to apply organizational theory to the study of telecommuting (Bailey and Kurland

2002; Desrochers et al. 2005; Mayo et al. 2009; Paez and Scott 2007; Virick et al. 2010; Ward

and Shabha 2001; Workman et al. 2003), little evidence has emerged to help explain the

conflicting findings found in the telecommuting literature.

The goal of this paper is to develop a conceptual model of telecommuting using a Socio-

Technical Systems Theory (STS) foundation. In doing so, we review existing literature on

telecommuting and identify three conceptualization issues we suggest should be addressed in the

development of a strong theoretical framework for telecommuting: telecommuting is often

considered a context only instead of an aspect of work, telecommuting is rarely considered as a

multi-level concept, and the time-dependency of telecommuting outcomes is often ignored. In

developing a framework that addresses these issues, our paper contributes to the literature by

providing a new lens to explore telecommuting research questions.

The paper is organized as follows: first, we review existing telecommuting literature and

highlight conceptualization issues that emerge from this literature. We then explore Socio-

Technical Systems Theory as a foundation for the development of the multi-level conceptual

model of telecommuting. We illustrate the use of the model with data from two organizations in

the high technology industry before concluding with recommendations for future research.

2. BACKGROUND
3
 There has been substantial research on telecommuting over the past decades as

telecommuting started to gain acceptance in organizations. With few exceptions, empirical

research on telecommuting started to appear in publications in the early 1980s. Rather than

review the early literature, we turn to several in-depth reviews published between 1998 and 2003

to summarize prior telecommuting research before examining more recent telecommuting

literature.

Table 1 shows the main findings of five literature reviews of telecommuting published in

the last decade. The reviews conclude that telecommuting research largely has been non-

theoretical highlighting the need for theoretical frameworks. This is not surprising as much of

the early telecommuting research has taken the form of investigating its advantages and

disadvantages. Two reviews note serious methodological weaknesses in the empirical studies

conducted, including small sample pilot studies, only bivariate relationships studied, and a focus

on cross-sectional surveys of users.

[Table 1]

A search of the various databases for telecommuting research from 2002 onward reveals

a number of studies that explicitly address telecommuting or mobile work for employees related

to an organization at least one day per week1 which are presented in Table 2.

[Table 2]

1
The context of interest in this paper is work away from an office but related to the organization as
opposed to full time home work. In the review, we also focused on empirical studies since the purpose of
the review is mainly to identify conceptualization issues1.

4
 The brief review of recent literature likely does not show the full extent of research that

has been published on telecommuting. Yet, in looking at both pre-2002 and recent

telecommuting work, it is clear that issues are slowly emerging in the literature while the social

and organizational environments are changing rapidly. These changes might be the result of

individuals working longer and longer hours, or our transition to the digital economy where it is

easier to transport work wherever one is, as long as ICTs are available. Indeed, the increased use

of mobile technologies to communicate and access information has accelerated the blurring of

lines between work and non-work activities (Axtell et al. 2008; Cousins and Robey 2005;

Kakihara and Sørensen 2004; Towers et al. 2006).

Orlikowski and Barley (2001) point out that IT practitioner-focused literature has been

consistently optimistic that the pervasive use of computers, and especially access to the Internet,

has created conditions that should lead to substantial increases in the number of telecommuters.

On the other hand, organizational theorists are pessimistic about the spread of telecommuting;

pointing out that the work practice is contrary to well-established social and cultural

understandings of how work takes place. Orlikowski and Barley (2001, p. 157) conclude: “Yet

despite these insights, neither view comes to grip with the social dynamics of telecommuting

because neither has investigated how people integrate telecommuting into their daily lives.” This

is particularly important as social and organizational changes are taking place that further insert

telecommuting into people’s daily lives. For example, as more corporations have activities that

span the globe, people increasingly work non-traditional hours, and much of this work takes

place at home.

In a qualitative study of meetings taking place at Intel Corporation, Chudoba et al. (2011

) found that participants were frequently from multiple, far-flung time zones, and expected to
5
attend meetings outside of traditional work hours. The following example from their study is

illustrative of the changes taking place. “While most respondents accepted the need for these

meetings … respondents devised interesting mechanisms to manage how the workday intruded

on “personal” time. For example, respondent 6 noted that his wife also worked at Intel so they

made use of each other’s calendars to schedule time commitments for family responsibilities. For

example, before accepting a late evening meeting, he might check his wife’s calendar to see if

she were available to pick up the children, and if so, add that commitment to her schedule so he

could attend the evening meeting.”

Despite these significant changes in the way work is conducted, findings from our

literature review indicate that researchers continue to more extensively focus on job satisfaction

of telecommuters, adoption of telecommuting by individuals and organizations, impact on job

satisfaction after adoption, and the relationship to work-family conflict. This may not be an

unexpected trend; as Orlikowski and Scott (2008) point out, management research generally does

not consider materiality of any kind and IT in particular.2 Moreover, there is usually a time lag

between the surfacing of changes in the organizational work environment and the development

of academic research addressing these new realities (Bélanger et al. 2002). However, we believe

a core limitation of this research continues to be the lack of theoretical grounding due in part to

the inherent complexity of the phenomenon. Telecommuting symbolizes a major shift in

understanding of work and professional activities for individuals, organizations, and society, in

addition to representing the deep penetration of ICT usage into the fabric of life at each level.

Managers need to be better equipped to deal with and use telecommuting strategically in their

2
We thank an anonymous reviewer for this insight.

6
organizations. Moreover, enterprise-wide use of wireless technology and mobile devices will

challenge management practices and stimulate changes in organizational design to accommodate

the increasing ability to work anywhere, including remote locations (Sørensen et al. 2008).

In an effort to resolve some of the inconsistencies in previous studies, Gajendran and

Harrison (2007) conducted a meta-analysis of 46 studies in which data were collected in natural

settings involving a total of 12,883 employees. They find that telecommuting has largely

beneficial consequences, both proximal, e.g., increased autonomy and lower work-family

conflict, and distal, e.g., job satisfaction and performance. Some negative effects were found

with high-intensity telecommuting (more than 2.5 days/week). In particular, relationships with

co-workers appeared to be harmed. Hunton and Norman (2010) found that telework programs

with the option of working at home or at a satellite office were associated with increased

organizational commitment for employees while similar programs with only a full-time work at

home option did not result in an increase. An ethnographic study by Whittle & Mueller (2009)

found significant dissatisfaction with telework expressed by a team of consultants at a high tech

firm. However, the consultants espoused more positive feeling to their clients.

Other recent studies continue to investigate factors influencing telecommuting adoption.

Perez et al. (2004) investigate why individual adoption of telecommuting has remained far below

predicted levels. They argue that a stronger theoretical basis is needed to investigate problems in

this domain and propose a model of telecommuting adoption based the technology acceptance

model (TAM). The model is multi-level, focusing on ease of use and usefulness of

telecommuting in the organization (supply side) instead of the usual measures of frequency of

telecommuting by individuals (demand side). Several recent studies, i.e., Peters and Heusinkveld

(2010), Hornung et al. (2009), have examined the role of the manager in the telecommuting
7
adoption process. Peters and Heusinkveld (2010) found that the perception of improvements in

work outcomes and social costs/benefits vary among managers from different 'occupational

communities', e.g., CEOs' beliefs differ from HR managers'. Their findings suggest that

telecommuting initiatives should pay much more attention to the institutional environment and

managers' subcultures.

Khalifa and Davison (2008) investigate the usefulness of the Theory of Planned Behavior

(TPB) to explain continuance of telecommuting by individuals after initial adoption. They find

that habit can negatively moderate the relationship between attitude toward telecommuting and

intention to telecommute. They also find that subjective norms, or the beliefs of the individual

that important others think he should telecommute, have a moderate effect on intention. Others

identify technology support as an important factor for employees to consider telecommuting

(Baker et al. 2006), highlighting the importance of training for non-telecommuters.

Studies have also investigated work-related consequences of telecommuting for the

individual, with findings that teleworking makes it much more difficult for employees to access

tacit knowledge (Lee et al. 2007), that communications among teleworkers is reduced with better

collaborative technologies but increasingly centralized around the manager of the teleworkers

(Bélanger and Allport 2008), and that professional isolation among teleworkers is negatively

associated with job performance and increases with time spent teleworking (Golden et al. 2008).

Golden and Veiga (2005) investigate inconsistent findings in research on telecommuter job

satisfaction. They found a curvilinear U-shaped relationship between the extent of

telecommuting per week and job satisfaction, suggesting that certain jobs may become more

difficult to perform effectively when telecommuting frequently. Golden (2007) found that

prevalence of telecommuting is negatively associated with non-telecommuting co-worker

8
satisfaction; this relationship is influenced by the amount of time co-workers telecommute, the

extent of face-to-face interactions, and job autonomy. O’Neill (2009) found that there are

differences in certain personality and motivational traits related to teleworker and non-teleworker

effectiveness.

Researchers have continued to examine the interplay of consequences of telecommuting

in work and non-work contexts. Golden (2006) found that the relationship between the extent of

telecommuting and job satisfaction was mediated by quality of interactions in work-oriented and

family-oriented relationships. Hartig et al. (2007) study the relationship between telecommuting

and stress mitigation, and the potential effect on the restorative role of the home. Their findings

indicate that teleworking women experience less effective restoration than their non-teleworking

counterparts while men experience more effective restoration. Similarly, Araujo (2008) found

that the use of ICT for to constructing space-time work patterns has different implications for

each gender. Results suggest that ICT is more useful to men than women in organizing their

space-time work patterns. In the context of nomadic computing, Cousins and Robey (2005) also

found that professionals skilled at technology use were able to control the boundaries between

their personal and business social contexts.

Other findings in this area include the fact that non-telecommuters have higher levels of

work-family conflict, time-based conflict, strain-based conflict (strain from work activities limits

participation in family activities) and higher perceptions of work interference with family than

telecommuters; and male telecommuters have higher levels of behaviour-based conflict

(behaviour effective in home-environment is counterproductive in work environment) than

females (Madsen 2006). However, the use of mobile technology enables flexibility in the timing

and location of the performance of work activities, and makes it easier to accommodate work and

9
family (Sørensen and Al-Taitoon 2008; Towers et al. 2006). The use of this technology also

increases expectations of colleagues in the work place and family members, leading to greater

workload.

2.1 Emerging Issues

The literature review reveals several core telecommuting conceptualization issues that

telecommuting theories need to address. Telecommuting conceptualization issues occur because

researchers have failed to consider different aspects of the telecommuting context, such as time-

dependent and multi-level outcomes as suggested by Bailey & Kurland (2002). For example,

only one study to date has taken a truly multi-year approach (e.g., Hunton and Norman 2010),

with a few longitudinal studies conducted across a timeframe of six months (Duxbury and

Neufeld 1999; Ramsower 1985). Yet, time poses a challenge for this type of research.

Telecommuting studies also have suffered from the lack of recognition of multiple levels of

analysis. While only the most recent review specifically highlights this problem in prior

telecommuting research, it is a core concept in organizational literature. In telecommuting,

outcomes for telecommuters have effect on and are affected by their co-workers’, managers’,

teams’ and subordinates’ outcomes (Pearlson and Saunders 2010). We discuss in the next

sections these telecommuting conceptualization issues, and then use socio-technical systems

(STS) theory as a guiding framework to develop the multi-level telecommuting conceptual

model.

3. CONCEPTUALIZATION ISSUES IN TELECOMMUTING RESEARCH

The review reveals several limitations in the conceptualization of telecommuting:

telecommuting as both a context and an aspect of work; telecommuting as a multi-level concept;

and telecommuting as a time-dependent concept.

10
3.1 Telecommuting as an Embedded Aspect of Work

Telecommuting is often considered the context or environment in which an individual’s

work is carried out, and not an aspect of the work itself. The assumption seems to be that the

same work will be done in the same way at home facilitated by ICT as in the office, but with less

interruption (Westfall 2004). During telecommuting, the type and characteristics of the ICT

artifacts are crucial to defining the context of work and its impacts on telecommuting work

outcomes. In the context of telecommuting, use of ICTs can be both an enabler and a constraint

to facilitating desirable work outcomes at several levels of analysis in organizations. So, even

though the setting where the work takes place is different, as well as methods of accessing

information and interacting with colleagues, little research has examined how work is actually

taking place (Orlikowski and Barley 2001). Fortunately, recent research is moving in this

direction. Golden (2007) collects data from non-telecommuters to understand the implications of

telecommuting on work performance throughout the workplace, not just on individuals. In one of

the few studies that begins to address the integration of a particular technology into the work

process, findings from Towers et al. (2006) as well as Kakihara (2004) suggest that the use of

mobile technology enables flexibility of timing and location of work, and makes it easier to

accommodate work and family but also increases expectations of both spheres, leading to greater

workload. Others identify both enablers and barriers to mobile work. Importantly, mobile work

can be hampered by existing business processes (Brodt and Verburg 2007) and mobile workers

need to be creative in developing their work spaces (Hislop and Axtell 2009). For certain jobs,

however, mobility may allow both individual and organizational needs to be met (Kakihara and

Sørensen 2004). Employing mobile phones to support foreign exchange trading proved to be

more usable than a fixed computer, at home or in more traditional locations, for the actual work
11
activities as well as personal needs of traders in a Middle Eastern bank (Sørensen and Al-Taitoon

2008).

In reality, the act of telecommuting may enable new and evolving conditions on the

nature of the work itself that must be taken into account. As others have pointed out, “Under a

new conceptualization, telework [telecommuting] might come to be seen as one of many

mechanisms individuals enact to cope with the demands of the modern workplace” (Bailey and

Kurland 2002).

3.2 Telecommuting as a Time-dependent Concept

An important issue in telecommuting research is the amount of time spent telecommuting

(Bélanger et al. 2001; McCloskey and Igbaria 1998; Ramsower 1985) as telecommuters’

experiences with telecommuting will impact their attitudes towards this work arrangement and

subsequent outcomes, although it is not often explicitly identified in most studies. The passing

of time can affect productivity and adoption of telecommuting by individuals. For example,

initially a worker may experience the flexibility enabled by telecommuting as a positive

experience. Yet, challenges may surface over time, e.g., the inability to get timely feedback from

people, or difficulties working with technology, that may reduce the worker’s propensity to

telecommute and lower her satisfaction with telecommuting.

The frequency of telecommuting also appears to influence satisfaction with

telecommuting. While many studies acknowledge variation in frequency, e.g., number of days

per week, few have investigated the influence on outcomes. In one of the few studies to examine

this question, Golden and Viega (2005) found a curvilinear U-shaped relationship between the

frequency of telecommuting per week and job satisfaction. The relationship was moderated

negatively by increased task interdependence and positively by low levels of job discretion. The
12
researchers suggest certain jobs may become more difficult to perform when frequency of

telecommuting is increased.

Many theories offer “snapshots”, focusing on a one-time experience with no accounting

for the compounding effects over time. Few researchers have taken this issue into account,

although some, e.g., Cousins and Robey (2005), Scheitzer and Duxbury (2006), Bélanger and

Allport (2008), did collect data from telecommuters at two points in time. Time can be

investigated from a diachronic perspective, i.e., across different periods, or from a synchronic

perspective, i.e., within one period. Both are important in the telecommuting context. Recent

studies have begun to investigate changing temporal patterns of work when telecommuting

(Araújo 2008; Towers et al. 2006).

Even though there are few studies acknowledging this, the effect of time on

telecommuting is central to understanding the implications of such work arrangements since time

is required for most effects to occur within or across levels of analysis. For example, the impacts

of telecommuting on a team may not be observed until individual team members have already

experienced telecommuting over time. Alternatively, different individuals on the team may have

different temporal patterns of work that may have to be reconciled. For that reason, a

telecommuting conceptual model should take into account compounding effects of

telecommuting over time to explore conflicting findings (Brodt and Verburg 2007).

3.3 Telecommuting as a Multi-level Concept

Telecommuting research often fails to recognize multiple levels of analysis. Yet,

outcomes for telecommuters have effect on and are affected by their co-workers’, managers’,

teams’ and subordinates’ outcomes (Pearlson and Saunders 2010). Consequently, researchers

should investigate the multiple levels of effects of telecommuting (Perez et al. 2004). For
13
example, telecommuting arrangements are commonly expected to motivate employees and

reduce organizational costs while improving individual and organizational productivity (Bailey

and Kurland 2002; Leonard 2000). Yet, most prior research has been conducted at either the

individual or organizational level of analysis (Bailey and Kurland 2002). We found few

examples of studies considering these multiple effects concurrently. Some studies do measure

factors at the individual level but make inferences at the organizational level (Cousins and Robey

2005). Other studies implicitly recognize the multi-level nature of telecommuting in general

(Jarvenpaa and Lang 2005) or its multi-level outcomes (e.g., Sanchez et al (2008); Whittle &

Mueller (2009)). However, most organizational and group level outcomes studied in

telecommuting research tend to be simple aggregations of individual-level telecommuting

experiences (Pinsonneault and Boisvert 2001). The emphasis on the individual in previous

research is perhaps not surprising as the phenomenon of telecommuting challenges our

understanding of an organization. Since the industrial age, a core tenant of the business

organization has been the separation of the individual’s home from the workplace. Thus, much

research has been concerned with the impact of this major change on the individual (Orlikowski

and Barley 2001).

Another interesting aspect that is rarely studied in relation to telecommuting is the group

as a level of analysis, even though research is needed at that level (Bailey and Kurland 2002).

Some studies examine telecommuters’ relationships with co-workers and find changes in

communication patterns among group members (Bélanger and Allport 2008) or negative impacts

on co-worker relationships with increased levels of telecommuting (Gajendran and Harrison

2007; Golden 2007). No telecommuting studies, however, seem to focus specifically on the

group level of analysis. It is not clear why there has been so little such research. It may be that
14
initial research on telecommuting in the USA was in the transportation field, where emphasis

was on individual travel patterns and environmental impacts of telecommuting. Yet, virtual

teams are increasingly important in organizations, and employees are almost always members of

at least one, and often, multiple teams (Bélanger and Watson-Manheim 2006). Some research areas

do focus on groups in distributed settings: CSCW (Computer Supported Cooperative Work) and

virtual teams. Yet, both CSCW and virtual team literatures do not specifically address

telecommuting contexts, and are often more relevant to within-organization groups.

Additionally, CSCW research often focuses on the technology itself, such as interfaces for

distributed work. Virtual teams literature has not focused on the location of individual in general

or telecommuting in particular; researchers have primarily investigated antecedents and emergent

processes influencing team effectiveness (e.g., review by Mortensen et al., (2009)).

The lack of emphasis on groups in telecommuting literature may have obscured some

important telecommuting relationships. For example, what might be the consequences for group

performance if one member is at home? Alternatively, what might be the consequences to

companies if individuals in several groups are simultaneously working remotely? In highly

distributed companies, the consequences may be different than in more traditional firms where

most employees are at the same site. Often, employees have different levels of

telecommunication access from home, potentially affecting the performance of the overall group.

For example, some groupware degrades to the lowest network characteristic or speed. In other

words, in a group where one employee is on a poor connection, it will have negative effects on

the entire group’s access speed. While this represents only one example, it is clear that the lack

of emphasis on group level effects of telecommuting may obscure the existence of compounding

effects of individual factors on work outcomes across levels of analysis in an organization.

15
 A few studies have examined firm-level consequences. Sanchez et al. (2008) found that

access to Human Resource commitment practices leads to increased intensity of telework

adoption, which is positively related to firm performance. Sanchez et al. (2007) found that firm

performance is positively related to the existence of teleworking programs. In a study with

respondents spread across 75 countries, Hill et al. (2010) found that workplace flexibility is

beneficial to individuals (due to decreased work-life conflict) and to firms (increased capacity for

longer work hours).

In summary, there are potential consequences to drawing telecommuting research

conclusions without considering multi-level factors. For example, in considering multi-level

issues in telecommuting, there is the potential of misaligned incentives across levels. Employees

may be rewarded for individual performance but expected to be available as a “team player” by

their manager, which also may be an important factor affecting promotion.

3.4 Summary

The review of the telecommuting literature reveals several conceptualization issues that

are implied but not typically considered by researchers, and highlights the lack of theoretical

foundations in this domain. The next section therefore addresses the call for increased use of

established organizational theory to guide future research and explain past paradoxes (Bailey

and Kurland (2003)) by proposing a multi-level conceptual model of telecommuting.

4. A MULTI-LEVEL SOCIO-TECHNICAL SYSTEMS TELECOMMUTING

FRAMEWORK

Socio-Technical Systems (STS) theory is used to guide the development of the multilevel

framework. STS is first utilized to define and integrate different aspects of telecommuting

specific to the telecommuters’ personnel subsystem, technical subsystem, and organizational

16
structure. It is also used to explicitly identify and account for the effects of both time and multi-

level factors that impact telecommuting work systems.

4.1 Socio-technical Systems (STS) Theory

STS theory has its roots in the socio-technical systems view of organizations (Katz and

Kahn 1966; Trist and Bamforth 1951). The theory has evolved through time as it has been used

and tested by researchers from various fields (e.g., Hendrick and Kleiner 2001; Holden and

Karsh 2009; Markham 1988). Socio-technical Systems Theory (STS) views organizations as

open work systems that transform inputs to desired outputs (Hendrick and Kleiner 2002;

Morrison et al. 2005; Pasmore 1988; Trist and Bamforth 1951). A work system consists of two

or more persons interacting using some form of job design, hardware and/or software machine(s)

or tool(s), and information/knowledge within structure or process(es) in both internal and

external environments. Work systems and organizations are considered open in that their

boundaries are permeable, allowing interactions with their environment across levels of analysis

(Katz and Kahn 1966). Thus, a socio-technical system can be as simple as a person performing a

task with a simple tool or as complex as a large number of individuals in a multi-national

enterprise working together using advanced ICT. Examples of applications of STS in the IS

literature include investigations of IT investment-decision processes (Ryan and Harrison 2000)

and user acceptance of ERP systems (Lim et al. 2005).

STS theory incorporates factors from four elements critical to transforming work system

inputs to outputs: technology-related factors included in the technical subsystem, social and

people-related factors included in the personnel subsystem, organizational structures and work

processes included in the organizational structure or work/job design subsystem, and the

17
environment external to the work system. These subsystems characterize the internal and

external contexts in which people perform their work, as shown in Figure 1.

[Figure 1]

The technical subsystem includes factors representing technologies, policies, and

practices that describe the modes of production (e.g., the type and level of ICT support for the

work), the actions individuals take on an object when performing work (e.g., the tasks

themselves), the strategy for reducing uncertainty in the process (e.g., policies or practices

whether supported by ICT or not), the degree of process/workflow integration (e.g., the degree of

automation or workflow rigidity), etc. (e.g., Brown 2002). Related to telecommuting, the

technical subsystem describes such factors as the types of ICT used when telecommuting, the

facilities available to telecommute from, the reward and compensation plans of the organization,

task/work design when telecommuting, etc.

The personnel subsystem includes at least three types of factors: demographic

characteristics of the workforce, psychosocial aspects of the workforce (e.g., dimensions of

personality, attitudes toward the work environment or the work itself, individual motivations,

etc.), and the degree of professionalism required to perform the work (e.g., values, norms, or

expected behaviour patterns of the job, team, and/or organization). Outcomes of the personnel

subsystem primarily describe the way tasks are performed. Related to telecommuting, factors

that are considered part of the personnel subsystem can include workers’ motivations to

telecommute, attitudes toward the work while telecommuting, beliefs or expectations for reward,

compensation, and/or communication when telecommuting, personality preferences for working

alone or in collaboration with others, telecommuter work/life balance issues, and telecommuter

demographics.
18
 The organizational structure subsystem is typically characterized in terms of

centralization, formalization, and complexity. Centralization refers to the level and degree of

formal decision-making in a work system (e.g., strategic, tactical, or operational). Formalization

refers to the degree to which jobs or tasks with a work system are standardized. There are two

types of complexity assessed in relation to the STS work system: differentiation and integration.

Differentiation complexity takes three forms – vertical, horizontal, or spatial – and refers to the

degree to which a work system or organization is segmented into parts. Integration complexity

refers to the type and number of mechanisms that are required in the work system to ensure

communication, collaboration, and control of the differentiated elements in a work system. In

general, the need for integrating mechanisms goes up as the degree of differentiation increases.

Related to telecommuting, the organizational structure subsystem characterizes such aspects of

the work system describing the number and degree of differentiation complexity existing in the

organization when telecommuting, the degree to which work tasks are standardized or ad hoc

(formalization) when telecommuting, and the location and degree of formal decision-making in

the work system, (centralization) when telecommuting.

The work environment describes the relevant characteristics of the context within which

the work system operates (both internal and external at whatever level of analysis). It is critical

that work systems and organizations be able to adapt to relevant factors in their environment.

Environmental factors that positively or negatively affect work systems in organizations can be

socioeconomic, educational, political, cultural, or legal. For each organization and work system,

these factors will differ in type, quality, and importance. For example, the external environment

of the telecommuting work system may describe the political climate in relation to stakeholders

external to the telecommuting work system being analyzed, the regional or national culture in
19
relation to trust and work, the work-group, team, or organizational traditions for collaborating

face-to-face vs. virtually, and the legal requirements for transacting business, protecting

proprietary information, or providing secure ICT infrastructure when telecommuting. These

subsystems continually and jointly interact with each other and both internal and external

organizational environments to produce work system outcomes and organizational survival

(DeGreene 1973; Hendrick and Kleiner 2002; Pasmore 1988; Trist and Bamforth 1951). For the

purposes of developing the multilevel telecommuting framework, we focus on the internal

subsystem environments (personnel, technical, structure) and limit our discussion of

environmental conditions external to the organization. STS suggests that there is interaction

between the subsystems. For example, the technical subsystem and organizational structure

conjointly affect the process of transforming antecedent inputs to outputs. In reality, the three

internal subsystems operate under the principle of joint causation, meaning they are affected by

other causal events in the telecommuting environment (Hendrick 2002; Katz and Kahn 1966).

This principle of joint causation leads to the STS concept of the joint optimization of a work

system.

Joint optimization refers to the potential or ability of work systems to accomplish their

intended transformative process(es). Typically, once designed, the technical subsystem is

relatively stable, and therefore, it is often left to the personnel subsystem to adapt to the

organizational structure and external environment. For example, when telecommuting, workers

may have to continuously interact with the ICTs and with the organizational structure (e.g. team

coordination), when performing tasks and producing outcomes. Consequently, the way

telecommuters perform their tasks may be significantly altered over time when compared to

workers who perform the same tasks but are not telecommuting. Thus, we argue that
20
interactions between the telecommuting personnel, technical, and organizational structure

subsystems result in outcomes for telecommuters at the multiple levels of analysis. Outcomes at

the group and organizational levels of analysis either emerge or are realized from the aggregation

of individual level telecommuting outcomes.

In our framework, we use the concepts of joint causation and joint optimization to

highlight feedback that exists over time and across levels of analysis as the work system seeks to

reach stability or steady state. The principles of joint causation and joint optimization can be

represented and operationalized with the concept of fit (Venkatraman 1989). For example, in

information systems, fit has been used to study the impact of task-technology fit on outcomes

(Goodhue and Thompson 1995; Vessey and Galletta 1991). Contingency theory researchers use

the concept of fit to look at the inter-relationships of constructs and their impacts on various

variables. Related to telecommuting, in a generic model of outcomes in distributed work

arrangements, Bélanger and Collins (1998) used Venkatraman's conceptualization of fit as

gestalt to consider the internal coherence between a large number of attributes (e.g., individual,

organizational, work, and technology characteristics) whose interactions could not be precisely

formulated. In the development of our multi-level STS telecommuting framework, we propose

that fit represents the interaction between the STS subsystems and their environment across

levels of analysis.

4.2 A Multi-Level Telecommuting Framework

STS theory can be used to theorize and analyze how multiple factors jointly influence

telecommuter work outcomes and worker motivations to telecommute over time. Additionally, it

can be used to conceptualize how telecommuting results in multi-level outcomes by jointly

impacting individual, group, and organizational level socio-technical factors – such as

21
individual-level satisfaction/dissatisfaction, team-level productivity, and organizational-level

absenteeism.

As discussed earlier, consequences of telecommuting at the group and organizational

level have been under researched as compared to the individual-level. As interdependent tasks

have become more spatially distributed, the need to understand the group-level implications

becomes more important. Recent research indicates that the configuration of the work group

may influence communication patterns and ultimately performance (O’Leary and Mortensen

forthcoming). The implication of different configurations, e.g., one isolated person as compared

to multiple isolated people, is just one area of group level analysis that could be explored. In

addition, many firms approach telecommuting from a strategic perspective, but little research has

addressed organizational-level implications. We propose to address these limitations with the

Multi-Level Telecommuting Framework presented in Figure 2, which is further described below.

The framework depicts high-level relationships between the theoretical constructs of the

telecommuting environment. In the framework, dashed lines portray the individual, group, and

organizational levels of analysis and represent the permeability of these components across

levels of analysis. In most complex organizational settings (a.k.a., the real world), the

telecommuting work environment is an amalgam of individual, group and organizational

contexts. Each individual telecommuter will therefore experience this combination of contexts

differently. Conceptually, however, the telecommuting subsystems should be depicted as

existing at different levels of analysis (Hendrick and Kleiner 2001; Klein et al. 1994; Rousseau

1985). In the model, subsystems are shown as interconnected, illustrating the principles of joint

causation with outcomes depicted at the individual, group, and organizational levels of analysis.

[Figure 2]
22
 At all levels of analysis, the framework specifies telecommuting personnel, technical, and

organizational structure subsystems that result in telecommuting work outcomes. Outcomes of

telecommuting propensities, motivations, behaviours, processes, and structures at the individual

level of analysis impact outcomes across levels of analysis. The same is true about the outcomes

of telecommuting propensities, behaviours, processes, and structures at other levels of analyses.

These outcomes, over time, will affect the multi-level socio-technical system factors that impact

future multi-level telecommuting behaviours and outcomes.

The framework can help researchers distinguish multi-level antecedents and outcomes of

telework to identify areas of importance to be investigated and identify gaps where significant

topics are not being addressed. In Table 3, we illustrate the use of the internal subsystems of

STS to show how antecedents and outcomes can differ across multiple levels of analysis in

telecommuting. For example, when investigating the performance of work activities by

telecommuters, the framework helps differentiate antecedents of performance at the individual-

level from the group and organizational levels, and it also makes clear that outcomes at the

individual-level will only partially explain overall performance implications.

[Table 3]

5. ILLUSTRATING THE MULTI-LEVEL TELECOMMUTING FRAMEWORK

An example of the applicability of the multilevel telecommuting framework can be

derived from data we collected to understand communication patterns and media choices in work

groups with distributed team members. Practitioner data was collected from two, Fortune 100

high tech ICT sales organizations where employees were given the option to telecommute. Data

23
from these organizations was collected using semi-structured interviews. For detailed

explanations see (omitted for anonymity in review).

5.1 Firm A

Firm A has a culture that relies heavily on email communication, and has a loose

organizational structure with sales people and technical workers interfacing on multiple virtual

project teams. There is a general lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities on these virtual

teams. Workers depend on their social networks to know who, where, and how to access

necessary information and to share knowledge. The amount of relationship development

(referring to the personnel subsystem) varies widely depending on what project a worker is

involved in at the time. The structural subsystem includes high task interdependence due to

individuals working on multiple project teams. Thus, the number of meetings and the project

management processes vary widely. Training on general company issues is provided, but little

training exists for how workers can best access information and share while telecommuting

(technical subsystem). Few workers possess permanent offices. Instead, hotelling facilities are

set up in remote locations where workers can schedule an office or work from home (resource

environment). At the organizational level, the online employee directory and Firm A’s intranet

are reported as good sources of general information. Also, the variety of ICT options and support

are reported as positive motivators at the group and organization level.

Despite organizational support for telecommuting, workers in Firm A report a general

lack of desire and frustration with this arrangement. Employees complain that the formal

training received was not useful. Telecommuting was also reported to result in poor information

gathering, lack of knowledge sharing, and little social network development. There was a

perceived lack of training at the group and organization levels on how to access and share
24
information effectively. At the group level, lack of interaction with peers resulted in limited

knowledge sharing within groups, and difficulty in finding and talking to people when needed

sometimes resulted in inefficient teamwork. At the individual level, most issues stemmed from

individuals’ lack of ability to develop relationships and be “plugged in” to the network so that

they could do their work effectively and efficiently. Working remotely is perceived to create

barriers to building social networks needed to get the work done. In addition, a perceived lack of

clarity of roles and responsibilities in groups is reported to make work more difficult. Finally,

there were positive outcomes for individuals in Firm A. Workers enjoyed the flexibility to work

at home and reduced travel distances and costs.

Firm A illustrates the impacts that organizational, group, and individual level factors can

have on individual workers choosing to telecommute, as shown in Figure 3. This organization

illustrates that the real barrier to telecommuting in Firm A is the lack of ability to build

knowledge and social networks that allow workers to access and share information in this highly

task interdependent environment. This effect occurs over time as individuals realize how

difficult it is to develop their networks of experts when they are not physically in the office. The

overall result is that, although telecommuting is supported by the culture and ICT, Firm A

workers generally preferred not to telecommute.

[Figure 3]

5.2. Firm B

Firm B sells total ICT solutions to primarily one client. Therefore, many of the sales and

technical workers’ offices are located at the client’s location. Firm B is organized around an

embedded matrix structure. Telecommuting was implemented in Firm B with the goal of

decreasing costs and providing better service to the client. Yet, the culture at Firm B emphasizes
25
customer satisfaction and spending face time with the customer. This results in a misalignment

of telecommuting and reward and compensation plans.

Sales and technical employees are expected to look for opportunities to sell the customer

on new ICT solutions while working on existing projects. Selection and promotion in Firm B is

based on “visibility and who you know.” For the structural subsystem, workers are assigned to

multiple projects and managers negotiate to get people they know assigned to their projects.

Firm B’s reward and compensation strategies for most sales and technical personnel are based on

a split percentage (e.g. 65/35, 80/20, etc.) between a base salary and revenue generation (based

on customer satisfaction and sales quotas). The worker, in yearly review meetings with his

superior, chooses this percentage. Account managers are given a base salary, but bonuses are

based entirely on customer satisfaction. The technical subsystem provides workers with

reimbursement for an extra phone line at home. Management control is primarily based on face-

to-face meetings and organizational communication is heavily reliant on email and face-to-face

meetings.

At the individual level, sales personnel report satisfaction with Firm B’s reward &

compensation plan (it is possible to earn up to 150% of their base salary), while most technical

personnel are dissatisfied with the plan. However, at the organization level, Firm B’s reward &

compensation plan reinforces existing functional silos and discourages groups from working

together. Individual access to necessary information from remote locations is restricted due to

organizational level security concerns. Therefore, workers cannot access many files they need to

work from home or remote locations. Some ICT applications are available to facilitate project

approvals but are not user friendly. These applications reportedly take too long to access

information, schedule meetings, and are difficult to operate because they are “over engineered.”
26
 At the group level, workers feel pressure from managers to be in front of the client or in

face-to-face group meetings (even if these meetings are spontaneously called and ICT is

available), which greatly discourages telecommuting. Further, group morale is reported as being

low due to a lack of social interaction, and a general perception that a lack of visibility make it

difficult to get on good projects, get to know key people in the organization, and ultimately to get

promoted. As one person pointed out, “it’s hard to stand out in an email crowd.” Workers also

report difficulties understanding common group goals when working away from the office.

Finally, telecommuters report there is not enough time to do all the tasks assigned to them.

Many reported feelings of isolation and a lack of connection to the organization and co-workers

since choosing to telecommute. Time plays a vital role as individuals experience increased

frustration with the work environment and with their group interactions as they try working

remotely. Eventually, they conclude that they have to be physically present to be able to function

in the organization.

Figure 4 illustrates the compounding, cross-level impacts of telecommuting in Firm B

caused by misaligned organizational culture, management practices, and reward & compensation

for telecommuters. In Firm B, telecommuting was implemented to improve customer and

worker satisfaction and increase organizational performance and sales. However, reward,

promotion, and compensation norms of the company based on face-to-face interaction (i.e.,

professionalism factors in the personnel subsystem) and security measures prevented workers

from accessing necessary information when telecommuting (i.e., factors associated with the

technical subsystem and external environment of the telecommuting work system). As a result,

few people chose to telecommute and morale plummeted among the workforce.

[Figure 4]
27
 6. IMPLICATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS

The multilevel telecommuting framework offers possibilities of conceptualizations to

address prior issues identified in the literature, including the need to account for time (through

feedback loops), to account for telecommuting being embedded in work practices (through the

STS subsystems), and to account for telecommuting being a multi-level concept.

The telecommuting framework has important implications for research and practice.

First, the varied and often conflicting findings in prior literature with respect to the effects of

telecommuting on work outcomes (e.g., better technology leads to better productivity) can

potentially be explained by introducing multiple levels of analysis and the effect of time on

telecommuting. Impacts of telecommuting factors across levels of analysis are inherent and of

vital importance in organizational research (Rousseau 1985), but multi-level issues have not been

expressly considered in telecommuting research (Bailey and Kurland 2002; Pearlson and

Saunders 2001). Examples of research questions this framework can help address include: Do

the factors in the telecommuting work environment that affect individual telecommuters also

affect virtual teams? What are the characteristics of ICT artefacts at different levels of analysis

that affect telecommuting behaviours and work outcomes?

It is also possible for individual, group, and organizational level motivators to be in

conflict with each other, affecting the decision to telecommute and making it difficult for

practitioners and academics to understand ultimate outcomes of telecommuting. For example, an

individual may want to work at home to increase productivity by reducing interruptions. At the

same time, he may experience group-level incentives to collaborate with co-workers, creating a

“distance” with colleagues. Thus, telecommuters may experience individual satisfaction with

telecommuting while at the group level there may be negative impacts on member relationships,
28
which may ultimately lead to reduced performance. Therefore, it is recommended that future

investigations by both academics and practitioners consider the multi-level nature of

telecommuting when exploring its various impacts.

Another key contribution is how the framework stresses the importance of looking at the

passing of time in studies of telecommuting. In prior literature, few, if any, studies have

attempted to address the compounding effects of telecommuting over time, which the proposed

theoretical framework takes into consideration It suggests that outcomes will not be static but

change as the experiences of each telecommuter change. Moreover, telecommuting behaviours

and work outcomes at one point in time are expected to be influenced by past experiences and in

turn affect future telecommuting experiences. Potential research questions include: How do

telecommuting work outcomes change over time when workers telecommute? Do

telecommuters report the same satisfaction and dissatisfaction after a single experience with

telecommuting as they do after several months? How do properties of telecommuting ICT

artefacts impact future telecommuting behaviors and work outcomes? Over time, what are the

adjustments to their work environments that organizations need to make after implementing

telecommuting to improve work outcomes? Only a truly longitudinal study could attempt to

evaluate these effects, and it is recommended that such studies should be conducted in the future.

Finally, the framework shifts telecommuting from the static context in which the work is

carried out to an embedded aspect of the work itself. For example, investigating the

implications of changes in communication patterns (e.g., as found by Belanger and Allport,

2008), and new forms of connectivity that are likely to emerge over time, becomes more salient

under this framework. These changes may have profound implications for organizations, which

are not likely to emerge when telecommuting is treated simply as a work setting.
29
 In addition to the recommendations above, several avenues for future research can be

explored with the framework. First and foremost, the theoretical framework needs to be tested in

a variety of telecommuting environments. A first step might be to evaluate the explanatory

power of the framework with data collected over time, from more than one organization, across

levels of analysis, and analyzed and integrated using the framework to allow comparisons.

Additional research can also explore other forms of technology-mediated work for which the

framework could apply. For example, how can the framework help explain findings related to

flextime? Do organizations with mandatory telecommuting policies exhibit similar antecedents

and consequences as organizations that allow individuals the choice to telecommute? The

framework can provide a lens to look at these and other research questions in the distributed

work domain. Finally, the framework could be extended according to STS to include the external

environment. Such an extension could help explore legal, cultural, or political impacts of

telecommuting on organizations, groups, and individuals.

7. CONCLUSION

Building on Socio-Technical Systems theory, a multi-level telecommuting framework

was developed, which proposes theoretical relationships that address the conceptualization issues

found in telecommuting research: namely, (1) telecommuting and its ICT artefacts as the context

or environment in which work is performed instead of just as an aspect of the actual work itself;

(2) telecommuting as a multi-level concept whose impacts are often realized at the individual

level of analysis but also have influences and outcomes across levels of analysis; and, (3)

telecommuting as a concept whose antecedents and outcomes have effects over time. The

theoretical framework can be used as a lens for evaluating past telecommuting research, and

developing new areas of inquiries in telecommuting.

30
 8. REFERENCES

Ahuja, M.K., and Galvin, J.E. 2003. "Socialization in virtual groups," Journal of Management
(29:2), pp 161-185.
Araújo, E.R. 2008. "Technology, Gender and Time: A Contribution to the Debate," Gender,
Work and Organization (15:5), pp 477-503.
Axtell, C., Hislop, D., and Whittaker, S. 2008. "Mobile technologies in mobile spaces: Findings
from the context of train travel," International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
(66:12), pp 902-915.
Bailey, D.E., and Kurland, N.B. 2002. "A review of telework research: Findings, new directions,
and lessons for the study of modern work," Journal of Organizational Behavior (23:4),
Jun, p 383.
Baker, E., Avery, G.C., and Crawford, J. 2006. "Home Alone: The Role of Technology in
Telecommuting," Information Resources Management Journal (19:4), pp 1-22.
Bélanger, F. 1999. "Worker's Propensity to Telecommute: An Empirical Study," Information and
Management (35), pp 139-153.
Bélanger, F., and Allport, C. 2008. "Collaborative Technologies in Knowledge Telework: An
Exploratory Study," Information Systems Journal (18:1), pp 101-121.
Bélanger, F., Collins, R., and Cheney, P.H. 2001. "Technology Requirements and Work Group
Communication for Telecommuters," Information Systems Research (12:2), June, pp
155-176.
Bélanger, F., and Collins, R.W. 1998. "Distributed Work Arrangements: A Research
Framework," The Information Society: An International Journal (14:2), May 1, pp 137-
152(116).
Bélanger, F., and Watson-Manheim, M.B. 2006. "Virtual Teams And Multiple Media: Structuring Media
Use To Attain Strategic Goals," Group Decision and Negotiations (15:4), pp 299-321.
Bélanger, F., Watson-Manheim, M.B., and Jordan, D.H. 2002. "Aligning IS Research and
Practice: A Research Agenda for Virtual Work," Information Resources Management
Journal (15:3), Jul-Sep, p 48.
Brodt, T.L., and Verburg, R.M. 2007. "Managing mobile work—insights from European practice,"
New Technology, Work & Employment (22:1), pp 52-65.
Brown, O., Jr. 2002. "Macroergonomics Methods: Participation," in: Macroergonomics: theory,
methods, and applications, H.W. Hendrick and B.M. Kleiner (eds.). Mahwah, N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. xi, 412.
Chudoba, K., Watson-Manheim, M.B., Crowston, K., and Lee, C.S. 2011 "ICT-Supported
Meetings in Practice," Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (23:2), April-
June, p In press.
Cousins, K.C., and Robey, D. 2005. "Human agency in a wireless world: Patterns of technology
use in nomadic computing environments," Information and Organization (15:2), pp 151-
180.
DeGreene, K.B. 1973. Sociotechnical systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Desrochers, S., Hilton, J.M., and Larwood, L. 2005. "Preliminary validation of the work-family
integration-blurring scale," Journal of Family Issues (26:4), May, pp 442-466.
Duxbury, L., and Neufeld, D. 1999. "An empirical evaluation of the impacts of telecommuting on
intra-organizational communication," Journal of Engineering and Technology
Management (16:1), Mar, p 1.
Gajendran, R.S., and Harrison, D.A. 2007. "The good, the bad, and the unknown about
telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences,"
Journal of Applied Psychology (92:6), pp 1524 - 1541.
31
Golden, T. 2006. "The Role Of Relationships In Understanding Telecommuter Satisfaction,"
Journal Of Organizational Behavior (27), pp 319-340.
Golden, T., and Viega, J.F. 2005. "The Impact of Extent of Telecommuting on Job Satisfaction:
Resolving Inconsistent Findings," Journal of Management (31:2), April, pp 301-318.
Golden, T.D. 2007. "Co-workers who telework and the impact on those in the office:
Understanding the implications of virtual work for co-worker satisfaction and turnover
intentions," Human Relations (60:11), pp 1641-1667.
Golden, T.D., Veiga, J.F., and N., D.R. 2008. "The impact of professional isolation on teleworker
job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-
to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? ," Journal of
Applied Psychology (93:6), pp 1412 -1421.
Goodhue, D.L., and Thompson, R.L. 1995. "Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance,"
MIS Quarterly (19:2), pp 213-235.
Hartig, T., Kylin, C., and Johansson, G. 2007. "The Telework Tradeoff: Stress Mitigation vs.
Constrained Restoration," Applied Psychology (56:2), pp 231 - 253.
Hendrick, H.W. 2002. "An overview of macroergonomics," in: Macroergonomics: theory,
methods, and applications, H.W. Hendrick and B.M. Kleiner (eds.). Mahwah, N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. xi, 412.
Hendrick, H.W., and Kleiner, B.M. 2001. Macroergonomics: An Introduction to Work System
Design. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
Hendrick, H.W., and Kleiner, B.M. (eds.). 2002. Macroergonomics: Theory, Methods, and
Applications. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hill, E.J., Erickson, J.J., Holmes, E.K., and Ferris, M. 2010. "Workplace Flexibility, Work Hours,
and Work-Life Conflict: Finding an Extra Day or Two," Journal of Family Psychology
(24:3), Jun, pp 349-358.
Hislop, D., and Axtell, C. 2009. "To infinity and beyond?: workspace and the multi-location
worker," New Technology, Work & Employment (24:1), pp 60-75.
Holden, R.J., and Karsh, B. 2009. "A theoretical model of health information technology usage
behaviour with implications for patient safety," Behaviour & Information Technology
(28:1), January-February, pp 21-38
Hornung, S., Rousseau, D.M., and Glaser, J. 2009. "Why supervisors make idiosyncratic deals:
antecedents and outcomes of i-deals from a managerial perspective," Journal of
Managerial Psychology (24:7-8), pp 738-764.
Hunton, J.E., and Norman, C.S. 2010. "The Impact of Alternative Telework Arrangements on
Organizational Commitment: Insights from a Longitudinal Field Experiment," Journal of
Information Systems (24:1), pp 67-90
Igbaria, M. 1999. "The Driving Forces in the Virtual Society," Communications of the ACM
(42:12), DEC, pp 64-70.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., and Lang, K.R. 2005. "MANAGING THE PARADOXES OF MOBILE
TECHNOLOGY," Information Systems Management (22:4), Fall2005, pp 7-23.
Joli, B. 2009. "Telecommuting Trends in the 2009 Economy." Bright Hub, from
http://www.brighthub.com/office/home/articles/22829.aspx
Kakihara, M., and Sørensen, C. 2004. "Practicing Mobile Professional Work: Tales of
Locational, Operational, and Interactional Mobility," The Journal of Policy, Regulation
and Strategy for Telecommunication, Information and Media (6:3), pp 180-187.
Katz, D., and Kahn, R.L. 1966. "Common characteristics of open systems," in: The social
psychology of organizations, D. Katz and R.L. Kahn (eds.). New York,: Wiley, pp. 14-29.

32
Khalifa, M., and Davison, R.M. 2008. "Explaining the intended continuance level of
telecommuting," International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management (5:3), pp
264 - 294.
Klein, K.J., Dansereau, F., and Hall, R.J. 1994. "Level Issues in Theory Development, Data
Collection, and Analysis," Academy of Management Review (19:2), pp 195-229.
Kuldeep, K., van Fenema, P.C., and Glinow, M.A. 2009. "Offshoring and the global distribution
of work: Implications for task interdependence theory and practice," Journal of
International Business Studies (40), pp 642 - 667.
Lee, H.G., B., S., and Higa, K. 2007. "Telework vs. central work: A comparative view of
knowledge accessibility," Decision Support Systems (43:3), p 687.
Leonard, B. 2000. "Telework Has Many Advantages," in: HRMagazine. pp. 23-24.
Lim, E.T.K., Pan, S.L., and Tan, C.W. 2005. "Managing user acceptance towards enterprise
resource planning (ERP) systems - understanding the dissonance between user
expectations and managerial policies," European Journal of Information Systems (14:2),
Jun, pp 135-149.
Madsen, S.R. 2006. "Work and Family Conflict: Can Home-Based Teleworking Make a
Difference?," International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior (9:3), pp 307-
350.
Markham, S.E. 1988. "Pay-for-Performance Dilemma Revisited: Empirical Example of the
Importance of Group Effects," Journal of Applied Psychology (73:2), pp 172-180.
Mayo, M., Pastor, J.C., Gomez-Mejia, L., and Cruz, C. 2009. "Why Some Firms Adopt
Telecommuting While Others Do Not: A Contingency Perspective," Human Resource
Management (48:6), Nov-Dec, pp 917-939.
Mazmanian, M.A., Orlikowski, W.J., and Yates, J. 2005. "Crackberries: The Social Implications
of Ubiquitous Wireless E-Mail Devices," in: Designing Ubiquitous Information
Environments: Socio-technical Issues and Challenges, C. Sørensen, Yoo, Y., Lyytinen,
K., DeGross, J.I. (ed.). New York: Springer, pp. 337-343.
McCloskey, D.W., and Igbaria, M. 1998. "A Review of the Empirical Research on
Telecommuting and Directions for Future Research," in: The Virtual Workplace, M.
Igbaria and M. Tan (eds.). Hershey: Idea Group Pub., pp. 338-358.
Morrison, D., Cordery, J., Girardi, A., and Payne, R. 2005. "Job design, opportunities for skill
utilization, and intrinsic job satisfaction," European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology (14:1), Mar, pp 59-79.
Mortensen, M., Caya, O., and Pinsonneault, A. 2009. "Understanding Virtual Team
Performance: A Synthesis of Research on the Effects of Team Design, Emergent
Processes, and Emergent States," in: Research Paper No. 4738-09. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Sloan School of Management.
O'Neill, T.A., Hambley, L.A., Greidanus, N.S., MacDonnell, R., and Kline, T.J.B. 2009.
"Predicting teleworker success: an exploration of personality, motivational, situational,
and job characteristics," New Technology, Work & Employment (24:2), pp 144-162.
O’Leary, M.B., and Mortensen, M. forthcoming. "Go (Con) figure: Subgroups, Imbalance, and
Isolates in Geographically Dispersed Teams," Organization Science).
Orlikowski, W., and Barley, S.R. 2001. "Technology and Institutions: What Information Systems
Research and Organization Studies Can Learn from Each Other," MIS Quarterly (25), pp
145-165.
Orlikowski, W., and Scott, S. 2008. "Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of
Technology," Work, and Organization. AoM Annals (2:1), pp 433-474.
Paez, A., and Scott, D.M. 2007. "Social influence on travel behavior: a simulation example of
the decision to telecommute," Environment and Planning A (39:3), Mar, pp 647-665.

33
Pasmore, W.A. 1988. Designing effective organizations: the sociotechnical systems
perspective. New York: Wiley.
Pearce, J.A. 2009. "Successful Corporate Telecommuting with Technology Considerations for
Late Adopters," Organizational Dynamics (38:1), Jan-Mar, pp 16-25.
Pearlson, K., and Saunders, C. 2010. Managing and Using Information Systems, (4 ed.). John-
Wiley.
Pearlson, K.E., and Saunders, C.S. 2001. "There's No Place Like Home: Managing
Telecommuting Paradoxes," Academy of Management Executive (15:2), pp 117-128.
Perez, M.P., Sanchez, A.M.L.C., and Pilar Jimenez, M.J.V. 2004. "A technology acceptance
model of innovation adoption: the case of Teleworking," European Journal of Innovation
Management (7:4), pp 280-291.
Peters, P., and Heusinkveld, S. 2010. "Institutional explanations for managers' attitudes towards
telehomeworking," Human Relations (63:1), Jan, pp 107-135.
Pinsonneault, A., and Boisvert, M. 2001. "The Impacts of Telecommuting on Organizations and
Individuals: A Review of the Literature," in: Telecommuting and Virtual Offices: Issues
and Opportunities, N.J. Johnson (ed.). London: Idea Group Publishing, pp. 163-185.
Pollster_YouGov_UK. 2007. "SW2000 Telework Studies." Retrieved January 8, 2009, from
http://www.noelhodson.com/index_files/statistics2006to2008.htm#_Toc229386682
Ramsower, R.M. 1985. Telecommuting: The Organizational and Behavioral Effects of Working
at Home. Michigan:
Rousseau, D.M. 1985. "Issues of Level in Organizational Research: Multi-level and Cross-level
Perspectives," in: Research in Organizational Behavior. pp. 1-37.
Ryan, S.D., and Harrison, D.A. 2000. "Considering social subsystem costs and benefits in
information technology investment decisions: A view from the field on anticipated
payoffs," Journal of Management Information Systems (16:4), Spr, pp 11-40.
Sánchez, A.M., Pérez, M.P., Carnicer, P.d.L., and Jiménez, M.J.V. 2007. "Teleworking and
workplace flexibility: a study of impact on firm performance," Personnel Review (36:1),
pp 42-64.
Sánchez, A.M., Pérez, M.P., Jiménez, M.J.V., and Carnicer, P.d.L. 2008. "Telework adoption,
change management, and firm performance," Journal of Organizational Change
Management (21:1), pp 7-31.
Schweitzer, L., and Duxbury, L. 2006. "Benchmarking the Use of Telework Arrangements in
Canada," Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (23:2), Jun, pp 107-109.
Siha, S.M., and Monroe, R.W. 2006. "Telecommuting's past and future: a literature review and
research agenda," Business Process Management Journal (12:4), pp 455 - 482.
Smith, R.L.J. 2004. "Work at Home Grows in Past Year by 7.5% in US." from
www.workingfromanyywhere.org/news/pr090204.htm
Sørensen, C., and Al-Taitoon, A. 2008. "Organisational usabilityof mobilecomputing-Volatility
and control in mobile foreign exchange trading," International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies (66), pp 916-929.
Sørensen, C., Al-Taitoon, A., Kietzmann, J., Pica, D., Wiredu, G., Elaluf-Calderwood, S.,
Boateng, K., Kakihara, M., and Gibson, D. 2008. "Enterprise Mobility: Lessons from the
Field," Information Knowledge Systems Management Journal - Special issue on
Enterprise Mobility (7:1 & 2), pp 243-271.
Towers, I., Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., and Thomas, J. 2006. "Time thieves and space invaders:
technology, work and the organization," Journal of Organizational Change Management:
Space and Time and Organisation Change (19:5), pp 593-618
Trist, E.L., and Bamforth, K.W. 1951. "Some Social and Psychological Consequences of the
Longwall Method of Coal-Getting," Human Relations (4:1), pp 3-38.

34
Venkatraman, N. 1989. "The Concept of Fit In Strategy Research: Toward Verbal and Statistical
Correspondence," Academy of Management Review (4:3), pp 423-444.
Vessey, I., and Galletta, D. 1991. "Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition,"
Information Systems Research (2:1), pp 63-84.
Virick, M., DaSilva, N., and Arrington, K. 2010. "Moderators of the curvilinear relation between
extent of telecommuting and job and life satisfaction: The role of performance outcome
orientation and worker type," Human Relations (63:1), Jan, pp 137-154.
Wajcman, J., Bittman, M., Brown, J. E. 2008. "Families without Borders: Mobile Phones,
Connectedness and Work-Home Divisions " Sociology (42:4), pp 635-652.
Ward, N., and Shabha, G. 2001. "Teleworking: An Assessment of Socio-Psychological Factors,"
Facilities (19:1/2), pp 61-70.
Watson-Manheim, M.B., and Bélanger, F. 2002. "Support for Communication-based Work
Processes in Virtual Work," e-Services Quarterly (1:3), Summer, pp 61-82.
Westfall, R. 2004. "Does Telecommuting Really Increase Productivity?” " Communications of
the ACM (47:8), August pp 93-96.
Whittle, A., and Mueller, F. 2009. "I could be dead for two weeks and my boss would never
know: telework and the politics of representation," Technology, Work and Employment
(24:2), pp 131-143.
Workman, M., Kahnweiler, W., and Bommer, W. 2003. "The effects of cognitive style and media
richness on commitment to telework and virtual teams," Journal of Vocational Behavior
(63:2), Oct, pp 199-219.
WorldatWork. 2009. "Telework Trendlines 2009." from
http://www.worldatwork.org/waw/adimLink?id=31295&from=presshome

35
Table 1. Telecommuting Literature Reviews

Authors Years Focus of Review Main Findings Concerns Raised

Covered
Bailey & 1984 to Who participates Male professionals and Research needs to go
Kurland 2001 in telework? female clerical workers beyond individual
(2002) Why they do? predominate. teleworkers.
What happens Research should revisit
when they do? No clear evidence why people telecommute.
telework increases job Research should
satisfaction and emphasize theory-
productivity. building using existing
theories.
Belanger & 1983- Distributed work Organizations use Previous research focuses
Collins 1996 arrangements in telecommuting to cut on bivariate relationships
(1998) general; most costs and as incentive to only.
literature is on best employees. No theoretical
telecommuting, Individual, work, underpinnings.
most common organizational, and Need more empirical
form of such technology variables research.
arrangements must fit to lead to Little hypothesis-driven
successful outcomes. research.
McCloskey 1982 - Review of the Telecommuting research Lack formal definitions
& Igbaria 1995 empirical research focused on five areas: of telecommuting.
(1998) for future small pilot studies, extent Methodological
directions of telecommuting weaknesses, i.e., small or
participation, beliefs and poorly constructed
perceptions of samples, cross-sectional
telecommuting surveys only.
(perceived impacts only), Lack control of
advantages and extraneous variables,
disadvantages of (i.e., employment status,
telecommuting, and work job type, telecommuting
and family issues. participation level).
Pinsonneault 1983 – Impacts of Schedule flexibility, no No particular concerns
& Boisvert 1999 telecommuting on interruptions, and raised.
(2001) individuals and commute savings as
organizations, and benefits; professional and
managerial social isolation as
implications drawbacks.
Siha & 1979- Explore state of Developed theoretical Need to better understand
Monroe 2002 telecommuting to model of antecedents and organizational,
(2006) date, identify outcomes of successful managerial, and worker
failure and success telecommuting motivations.
factors initiatives.

36
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
Author Research Question(s) Methodology & Main Findings
Sample
Kakihara (2004) Discuss the emergence Ad hoc observation Need to broaden our conception of
of the mobile and interviews: 62 mobility; mobile professional
professional mobile professionals involves locational, operational,
in Tokyo; 3 cases and interactional mobility.
presented in the
paper.
Perez, Sanchez Develop theoretically- Conceptual Model of teleworking adoption
& Pilar Jimenez based model of telework based on Technology Acceptance
(2004) adoption. Model (TAM).
Cousins (2005) Explored practices of 1 case (financial Although users experienced
individual nomadic institution in USA); contradictory outcomes as they
computing users after observations, sought resolutions to the dilemmas
implementation of a documents, and posed by work and nonwork
nomadic computing interviews: 4 loan demands, all users reported
environment. officer; 2 effectiveness in their computing
interviewed again 3 practices.
months after change
Golden & Veiga Reconcile inconsistent Survey: one firm, Curvilinear relationship between
(2005) findings in research on data from 321 extent of telecommuting and job
telecommuter job telecommuters satisfaction. Relationship
satisfaction. moderated by task characteristics.
Jarvenpaa Examine experiences of 33 international Identifies eight central mobile
(2005) mobile technology users focus groups with technology paradoxes that shape
in Hong Kong, Japan, 222 urban mobile user experience and behavior;
Finland, and the United devices suggest possible design features
States. that relate to the paradoxes, and
discusses how these features could
be better managed.
Mazmanian Examining use of 69 semi-structured People differentiate wireless e-
(2005) wireless email devices interviews in 3 mail devices from other
among mobile organizations with communication technologies in
information mobile professionals terms of patterns, norms, and
professionals and their experience of use.
spouses, including Participants report constant and
effects of social sustained interaction with their
presence, physical and devices, at all hours and locations
virtual interactions, and of their day.
public environments
Baker, Avery & Is there a relationship Survey: 20 firms in Support more closely related to
Crawford (2006) between forms of Australia, 50 technology has more impact on
technology support and respondents who reactions to telecommuting than
employee reactions to telecommute at least support less closely related to
telecommuting? one day per week technology.
Golden (2006) Examines role Survey: one firm, U-shaped relationship between
37
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
relationships play in data from 294 extent of telecommuting and job
mediating link between telecommuters satisfaction, mediated by quality
extent of telecommuting of interactions in work-oriented
and job satisfaction. and family-oriented relationships.
Madsen (2006) Investigate differences Survey of Non-telecommuters have higher
in work family conflict telecommuters and levels of work-family conflict,
between telecommuters non-telecommuters time-based conflict, strain-based
and non-telecommuters. at seven firms in conflict, and higher perceptions of
Midwest USA work interference with family than
telecommuters do. Male have
higher levels of behaviour-based
conflict than females
telecommuters.
Scheitzer & Assess state of Survey data Increase in number of firms
Duxbury (2006) telecommuting in collected in 1999 offering telecommuting - from 3%
Canada in 1999 and in and 2001 from over in 1999 to 7% in 2001.
2001. 20,000 employees & Participants: highly educated,
6,300 employers in well-paid, male and female
Canada knowledge workers with
dependent care responsibilities.
Towers, Investigate the shifting Survey and Mobile technology enables
Duxbury, boundaries between interview data from flexibility of timing and location
Higgins & home and work for non- a Canadian of work. Easier to accommodate
Thomas (2006) telecommuters using government agency. work and family but increases
mobile technology. 845 surveys and 61 expectations of both spheres and
interviews leads to greater workload.
Brodt (2007) Identify enablers and 5 cases; Adequate skills, sufficient
barriers for successful 15 in-depth commitment and a systematic
implementation of interviews preparation are key enablers to the
mobile work in practice. success of mobile work
environments.
Potential barriers for mobile work
environments arise mainly from
the changes of work processes and
work styles of mobile workers.
Gajendran & Study consequences of Meta-analysis of 46 Telecommuting has largely
Harrison (2007) telecommuting for studies in natural beneficial consequences. Some
individuals; through settings involving negative effects found with high-
what psychological 12,883 employees intensity telecommuting (more
mechanisms do effects than 2.5 days/week).
occur; under what
conditions do strongest
effects occur.
Golden (2007) Investigates whether Survey of 240 Prevalence of telecommuting is
prevalence of educated non- negatively associated with co-
telecommuters in an telecommuting worker satisfaction; relationship
office impacts work professionals in a influenced by amount of time co-
outcomes of non- high-technology workers telecommute, level of
38
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
telecommuters. company in the US FTF interactions and job
autonomy.
Hartig, Kylin & Investigate tradeoffs Survey: 58 Teleworkers and non-teleworkers
Johansson between stress teleworkers and 43 experience home as place of
(2007) mitigation of non-teleworkers in restoration; teleworking women
teleworking and possible one Swedish report less, and men more,
effect on restorative company effective restoration than non-
function of home. teleworking counterparts.
Lee, Shin & Examine gap between Study in seven large Significant discrepancies between
Higa (2007) telework and central Japanese companies: telework and central-work in
work in accessing tacit 58 survey responses knowledge accessibility and in
knowledge and in use of and 35 interviewees: patterns of media usage for
communication media telecommuters, and knowledge access. Teleworking
for knowledge mobile and satellite made it more difficult to access
exchange. office workers tacit knowledge.
Sanchez, Perez, Explores the relationship Structured Firm performance is positively
Carnicer & between teleworking interviews: related to teleworking programs.
Jimenez (2007) adoption, workplace managers at 479 Teleworking firms use more
flexibility, and firm small and medium- flextime, have more employees
performance. sized firms in involved in job design, are more
northwest Spain intensively managed by results and
use more variable compensation.
Araujo (2008) Investigates how Interviews: 38 Use of ICT to construct space-time
university lecturers deal university lecturers work patterns has different
with space and time in in two Portuguese implications for each gender.
professional activities. universities
Axtell (2008) Looks at differences Surveys: 350 in UK Majority of tasks conducted on
between train-based plus 19 interviews train are socially independent in
mobile work and office nature (without the need for
environments. Explore communication with others).
the main impacts of train People make technological task
mobile work on tasks. and contextual adaptations to
allow them to work to conduct
socially interdependent work
(need for communication with
others).
Bélanger & Explore the effects of Case study: 6 Communication frequency among
Allport (2008) improvements in months pre and post group members was reduced after
technology for technology change the technology improvement but
teleworkers on surveys and became more centralized around
communications interviews of 13 the district manager.
patterns. teleworkers and
their management.
Golden, Veiga & Examine professional Survey: matched Teleworker professional isolation
Dino (2008) isolation of teleworkers sample of 261 is negatively associated with job
and the relationship with professional-level performance; impact is greater
job performance and teleworkers and with more time spent teleworking.
turnover intention. their managers in Unexpectedly, professional
39
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
one high-tech firm isolation is related to lower
turnover intention.
Khalifa and Investigate the Survey: 101 Attitude has significant effect on
Davison (2008) applicability of TPB to telecommuters in intention but is negatively
explain intended companies in North moderated by habit; subjective
continuance level of America norms exert moderate effect on
telecommuting. intention to telecommute.
Sanchez, Perez, Analyze contribution of Survey: HR Access to HR commitment
Jimenez, HR through adoption of managers and CEOs practices lead to intensity of
Carnicer (2008) telework or workplace in Spanish firms, telework adoption, which is
flexibility practices to 156 responses positively associated with firm
firm performance. performance.
Sørensen & Al- Explores how the Data collected from Home-trading with fixed location
Taitoon (2008) concept of 72 employees of PC, created tight physical coupling
organizational usability ‘MidEastBank’ in- between traders and the location of
can contribute to better depth interviews, trading led to temporal
understanding of the observations of discontinuity in the monitoring of
organizational use of work activities, markets since traders could not be
mobile ICT. Investigate analysis of voice in front of the desktop
4 mobile work options recordings of off- continuously. Mobile trading,
for 24hr foreign premise transactions which allowed work at home,
exchange trading, delivered sufficient loose coupling
including trade at home of traders and locations to be
option. individually and organizationally
usable.
{Sørensen, Highlight key Review of findings Identified six different
2008 #232} management from 11 previously challenges of seeking to gain
challenges in the published case organisational efficiency,
mobile work studies of mobile including tensions between
environment. work individual discretion vs.
organizational control and
transformation of existing work
practices vs. cultivation of new
practices.
Wajcman et al. Investigate proposition Data collected from Results indicate that mobile phone
(2008) that mobile phone individuals aged 15 is not primarily a work extension
dissolves boundaries years and older in device. The volume of work-
separating work and households in related traffic outside of hours of
home, thus extending the Australia, from employment was found to be low
reach of work. March to May 2007, and the main uses of the mobile
using a were for contacting family and
questionnaire, a friends.
phone log and a
time-diary
Hislop (2009) Explores multi-location Interviews: 18 Spaces used by multi-location
work of teleworkers. consultants from 2 workers vary significantly from
small UK the workplaces of workers who
40
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
consultancies. work predominantly from a single
location; multi-location workers
typically have to invest more
effort in creating and producing a
workplace in the locations that
their work takes them to.
Hornung, Study of idiosyncratic Survey: 263 Results indicate that supervisors
Rousseau, deals (i-deals) where supervisors can be motivated to authorize
Glaser (2009) workers shape their managing effective i-deals in the context of
employment telecommuting broader organizational programs
arrangements through employees in that legitimate and support their
negotiating German public negotiation.
individualized administration
employment conditions
facilitated by
telecommuting.
Mayo, Pastor, Using a contingency Survey: 102 Spanish Empirical evidence showed that
Gomez-Mejia, & perspective and data & Portuguese telecommuting is correlated with
Cruz (2009) from 122 CEOs of CEO’s compared to small organizational size, a high
Spanish firms, this paper public business data proportion of international
examines what makes a employees, and variable
firm likely to adopt compensation.
telecommuting.
O’Neill (2009) Explore personality and Survey: 156 Certain personality and
motivational traits employees from motivational traits are related to
related to teleworker 8 organizations in teleworker and non-teleworker
performance and Canada: 78 effectiveness, but some traits show
satisfaction . teleworkers and 78 differential validity. There are also
non-teleworkers situational differences (children,
tenure, etc.)
Hill, Erickson, Explores the influence Survey: global Across all four groups of
Holmes & Ferris of workplace flexibility sample of workers in countries, the benefit of work-at-
(2010) on work-life conflict; 75 countries (N = home is increased when combined
specifically examine 24,436) with schedule flexibility.
flexibility in where Workplace flexibility is beneficial
(work-at-home) and both to individuals (in the form of
when (perceived reduced work-life conflict) and to
schedule flexibility) businesses (in the form of capacity
workers engage in work- for longer work hours). However,
related tasks. work-at-home may be less
beneficial in countries with
collectivist cultures.
Hunton & Investigate impact of Longitudinal study Participants in three of the
Norman (2010) telework arrangements (2 years) of 160 telework arrangements exhibited
on organizational participants (medical significant increases in all aspects
commitment and coders) in 5 of commitment. In groups
relationship between hospitals : telework working exclusively at home,
telework arrangements, arrangements across organizational commitment was
41
Table 2. Recent Research on Telecommuting
organizational hospitals differed equivalent to the control groups.
commitment, and task with one control Found organizational commitment
performance. group; unbalanced mediates relationship between the
randomized 2x2x1 telework arrangements and task
design performance.
Peters & Examines the role of Survey: 96 CEOs Perceived improvements of work
Heusinkveld managers in the and 380 HR outcomes and social costs/benefits
(2010) telework adoption managers in Dutch vary among managers from
process; especially organizations different 'occupational
influence of institutional communities', e.g., CEOs' beliefs
context on attitude differ from HR managers'.
toward telecommuting. Telecommuting initiatives should
pay much more attention to the
institutional environment and
managers' subcultures.

42
 Organizational
Structure / Work
Design

Technical Personnel
Subsystem Subsystem

External Environment

Figure 1. Basic Socio-technical Work System Model

43
Table 3. Sample Telecommuting Antecedents and Outcomes across Levels of Analysis

STS Subsystem Individual Group Organizational

Level of Analysis Level of Analysis Level of Analysis
Personnel Antecedents: Antecedents: Antecedents:
(Factors related to • Individual characteristics • Work relationships • Perceptions of
personal, social such as introversion or that facilitate group telecommuters in
and cultural extraversion work outcomes organization
characteristics or • Suitability of home-life • Group cultural norms • Organizational
issues affecting situation for telework • Group knowledge cultural norms
• Understanding of how to networking
telecommuters)
access the information and • Understanding of who
knowledge needed to perform is doing what
work • Understanding of who Outcomes:
• Individual satisfaction / knows what • Professional
dissatisfaction with social relationship
factors Outcomes: development
• Professional opportunities
Outcomes: relationship • Social network
• Work vs. home-life balance development impacting access to
issues opportunities necessary
• Professional relationship • Group communication information and
development • Group information and recognition
• Feelings of isolation knowledge exchange • Organizational
• Individual task performance • Group performance performance
Technical and Antecedents: Antecedents: Antecedents:
Work • Individual satisfaction and • Group task design • Accessibility to
(Factors dissatisfaction with task • Use of ICT to large amounts of
describing how design facilitate group work information
work is performed • Individual task design and collaboration • Security policies
and the types and • Managerial control practices • Group decision- • ICT operating
availability of ICT • Types and availability of ICT making processes procedures
(i.e., IT artifacts) • Managerial control • Value-adding
and other
• Characteristics or properties practices business processes
resources needed of the IT artifacts (i.e., ICT) • Group ICT available • Organizational ICT
to perform work) • Level of use of ICT required (i.e., IT artifacts) available (i.e., IT
• Reward & compensation • Characteristics or artifacts)
strategies properties of the IT • Characteristics or
• Availability of permanent artifacts (i.e., ICT) for properties of the IT
office space group work artifacts (i.e., ICT)
• Availability of support & • Group reward & that support or affect
training compensation the organization
• Availability of other workers • Telework training during
when needed • Level of availability of telecommuting
• Satisfaction/dissatisfaction good workers when • Support and training
with compensation & needed for ICT
resources available • Training and support
Outcomes: for how to work in
• Structuring of work telework
• Availability of environment
Outcomes: workers when needed
• Impact on gaining access to • Availability of Outcomes:

44
 required task information information to group • Ability to locate
• Individual task performance when telecommuting people with specific
• Access to organizational • Quality of knowledge of task
applications communication in information needed
• Perceived quality of ICT virtual teams • Ability to access
support • Group task specific to data,
• Problems using ICT performance information,
• Individual task performance • Access speed for wisdom, &
• Satisfaction/dissatisfaction group application knowledge needed
with compensation & • Number of formal • Impact on office
resources available meetings costs
• Time spent in formal • Impacts on ICT
meetings support costs
• Group task • Impacts on IT
performance infrastructure

Organizational Antecedents: Antecedents: Antecedents:

Structure • Role clarity • Task interdependence • Variability in
(Factors • Number of work projects to • Variability in management
describing work on management practices practices over
organizational • Number of direct / indirect • Existence of role multiple projects
reporting relationships clarity within the that use the same
structure and
roles) • Role variability group people
• Number of formal meetings • Number of direct • Levels of
• Number of informal meetings reports management
/ interruptions • Number of formal
meetings
Outcomes:
• Change in available Outcomes:
individual time due to change • Impacts on group Outcomes:
in the number of formal performance • Information security
meetings • Impacts on managerial impacts
• Impacts on informal control • Difficulty measuring
management feedback • Number of formal impacts of telework
• Difficulty on managing a group meetings • Organizational
dispersed team or group • Group task performance
(manager) performance
• Individual task performance

45
 Figure 2. A Multi-level STS Telecommuting Framework

Figure 3. Illustrating the Multilevel Telecommuting Framework in Firm A

46
Figure 4. Illustrating the Multilevel Telecommuting Framework in Firm B

47