An official website of the United States government
In distributed organizations, perceived status differences between workers are ubiquitous and harmful. Yet research suggests that once they are formed, status beliefs in organizations become entrenched in hierarchies and are hard to dismantle. In an inductive qualitative study, we observed how established status differences between remote and in-person workers in distributed organizations dissolved during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic when everyone began working remotely. We use these data to theorize a novel status-equalizing process through which remote workers came to see themselves on an “equal playing field” with their in-person peers. We theorize how this status equalizing occurred through workers’ changing their “in-person default” use of technology—that is, their new behavior challenged embedded cultural practices that had treated the in-person workplace experience as the standard, normal, and valued perspective, implicitly guiding how employees used technology. Workers adopted new and more inclusive technology practices—including the use of asynchronous communication, greater codification of work, and virtual socializing—which resulted in remote workers perceiving new and more equal communication standards, access to information, and opportunity for social connection. As a result, these workers reported feeling less negatively stereotyped and treated more fairly in their virtual interactions with colleagues, fostering feelings of inclusion and deepening relationships across the previously established status divide. At a time when many organizations are grappling with the challenges of distributed, remote, and hybrid work, our research illuminates how inclusive technology practices can help nullify entrenched status imbalances.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on October 18, 2026
What Remotely Matters? Understanding Individual, Team, and Organizational Factors in Remote Work at Scale
Although knowledge workers are increasingly able to adopt remote and hybrid working arrangements and work productively, many organizations continue to question the effectiveness of remote work and focus on its concerns and challenges. Previous CSCW research shows that remote workers have limited awareness of other workers, require more explicit coordination, and feel excluded from in-person colleagues. Research also shows that adopting work practices and technologies that are remote work-friendly can offset many of these challenges. Identifying which effective practices and challenges are most helpful or hurtful to remote workers-and how workplace attributes (e.g., team structure; communication frequency; tool use) affect them-could strengthen organizations' strategies and policies for remote work. Through a theoretically-informed survey of 1,526 U.S. knowledge workers, we find many factors prior research has argued as essential to remote work, such as knowing your teammates personally, to be the least important for remote workers, and show how workplace attributes influence those perceptions. We provide theoretical and practical implications for future research for organizations that wish to support remote and hybrid work modalities.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2052366
- PAR ID:
- 10670931
- Publisher / Repository:
- Google Scholar
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
- Volume:
- 9
- Issue:
- 7
- ISSN:
- 2573-0142
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 47
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The upsurge in remote and hybrid work practices has prompted researchers to explore the technological, organizational, and psychological dimensions of remote work. However, the nuanced dynamics of balancing familial duties, especially care work for older adults, and professional work is often overlooked in the literature. This balancing act introduces unique stressors, blurring work and personal life boundaries, potentially causing physical stress or prompting care providers to leave their jobs. The inherent nature of remote work executed within the familial sphere underscores the importance of understanding how care responsibilities impact the remote work experience. This study addresses this gap by focusing on informal care providers, an understudied population in the CSCW remote work literature. Through a diary study and interviews, we investigate challenges remote workers face and the role of technology in their work. Findings highlight the prevalence of care work, emphasizing the need for targeted technological interventions to support the well-being and productivity of remote workers managing care duties. Critical challenges include familial responsibilities on higher-stress days, lack of communication regarding availability, personal time sacrifices for productivity, coordination in place making among care providers, and multitasking on days with familial responsibilities or distractions. This exploratory study underscores the importance of assisting care providers in a way that embraces their (possible) role as remote workers, offering insights for future research and technological interventions to support remote workers navigating the complexities of care work.more » « less
-
There is a rich literature on technology’s role in facilitating employee monitoring in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic created many challenges for employers, and many companies turned to new forms of monitoring to ensure remote workers remained productive; however, these technologies raise important privacy concerns as the boundaries between work and home are further blurred. In this paper, we present findings from a study of 645 US workers who spent at least part of 2020 working remotely due to the pandemic. We explore how their work experiences (job satisfaction, stress, and security) changed between January and November 2020, as well as their attitudes toward and concerns about being monitored. Findings support anecdotal evidence that the pandemic has had an uneven effect on workers, with women reporting more negative effects on their work experiences. In addition, while nearly 40% of workers reported their employer began using new surveillance tools during the pandemic, a significant percentage were unsure, suggesting there is confusion or a lack of transparency regarding how new policies are communicated to staff. We consider these findings in light of prior research and discuss the benefits and drawbacks of various approaches to minimize surveillance-related worker harms.more » « less
-
Many technology companies aim to improve access and inclusion not only by making their products accessible but also by bringing people with disabilities into the tech workforce. We know less about how accessibility is experienced and negotiated by disabled workers within these organizations. Through interviews with 20 BLV workers across various tech companies, we uncover a persistent misalignment between organizational attempts at accessibility and the current realities of these employees. We introduce the concept of the accessibility paradox, which we define as the inherent tension between the productivity- and profit-driven nature of tech companies and their desire to hire and retain disabled workers. Focusing on the experiences of BLV workers, we show how the accessibility paradox manifests in their everyday workplace interactions, including digital infrastructure, accommodations processes and policies, ability assumptions, and competing priorities. We offer recommendations for future research and practice to understand and improve workplace accessibility and inclusion.more » « less
-
Remote and hybrid work have received much attention since the expansion of off-site work following the COVID-19 pandemic. Research on the effects of these arrangements on workers’ well-being, however, is mixed, likely because studies rarely account for workers’ workplace preferences. Using data from the 2023 wave of the Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 (SPDLC), we assess the association between work-place mismatch (misalignment between preferred and actual work locations) and both work-family conflict and psychological well-being (stress and depressive symptoms) among partnered working parents. Results suggest that most parents report some degree of work-place mismatch, with on-site workers reporting the highest work-place mismatch. We also find that work-place mismatch is positively associated with work-family conflict and negatively associated with parents’ psychological well-being. After accounting for work-place mismatch, parents who work on-site report lower work-family conflict and higher psychological well-being than remote and hybrid workers. Overall, results highlight the need to account for workers’ preferences in understanding the association between work conditions, work-family conflict, and psychological well-being.more » « less
