Motivation in the Remote Workplace Understanding the Threats and Opportunities to Motivation During Enforced Remote Work

DEGREE PROJECT IN INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2021

ALEXANDER DRYSELIUS

JOEL PETTERSSON

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

Abstract In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, organizations across the world have been forced to move operations into the homes of its employees. This shift has dramatically changed the individual workplace contexts that employees are subject to, raising questions about which effects this will have on employee motivation. As levels of motivation relates to both productivity and well-being of individuals, it is critical that organizations know how motivation can be facilitated in a remote working (or “teleworking”) context so as to safekeep the productivity and well-being of their employees. Through semi-structured interviews, this study gathers the opinions and experiences of employees from five different companies in knowledge intensive sectors. Analysing this material we constructed seven recurring themes that were related to motivation. Viewing these themes through a theoretical framework based on previous studies of remote working, the Job Demands-Resources Model, and Self-Determination Theory we conclude that teleworking affects motivation in the areas of lacking social interaction, the level of informational transparency in the organization, challenges to work-life balance, a responsibility shift between managers and employees, troubles reaching out for support, digital meetings, and perceptions of learning. We conclude the study by providing managers and employees with lists of practical guidelines that can help them facilitate motivation in the teleworking context.

Keywords Motivation, Self-Determination theory, Teleworking, Remote working, Self-leadership, Work-Life balance

Sammanfattning

I kölvattnet av Covid-19-pandemin har organisationer över hela världen tvingats flytta verksamheten till de anställdas hem. Denna förändring har dramatiskt förändrat individernas egna arbetsplatskontexter. Detta väcker frågor om vilka effekter detta kommer att få på anställdas motivation. Eftersom motivation är relaterat till produktivitet såväl som välbefinnande hos individer är det avgörande att organisationer vet hur motivation kan underlättas i ett fjärranslutet (eller "distansarbetande") sammanhang för att skydda sina anställdas produktivitet och välbefinnande. . Genom semistrukturerade intervjuer samlar denna studie in åsikter och erfarenheter från anställda från fem olika företag inom kunskapsintensiva sektorer. Genom att analysera detta material konstruerade vi sju återkommande teman som var relaterade till motivation. När vi tittar på dessa teman genom en teoretisk ram baserad på tidigare studier av distansarbete, Job Demands-Resources-modellen och Self-Determination-teorin drar vi slutsatsen att distansarbete påverkar motivation inom områdena med bristande social interaktion, nivån av transparens inom organisationen, utmaningar i balansen mellan arbete och privatliv, en ansvarsförskjutning mellan chefer och anställda, svårigheter att be om hjälp för att lösa problem, digitala möten och upplevelsen av lärande. Vi avslutar studien med att ge chefer och anställda en lista med praktiska riktlinjer som kan hjälpa dem att facilitera motivation i distansarbete.

Keywords

Motivation, Self-Determination theory, Teleworking, Remote working, Self-leadership, Work-Life balance

Abstract 1

Sammanfattning 2

1 Introduction 6 1.1 Background 6 1.2 Purpose 7 1.3 Research Question 7 1.4 Delimitations 7 1.5 Contribution 8

2 Theoretical Framework 8 2.1 Teleworking 8 2.1.1 Teleworking and Productivity 8 2.1.2 The Teleworking Workplace 9 Job Crafting 9 2.1.3 Challenges of Teleworking 10 Psychological Challenges 10 Physical and Temporal Challenges 10 2.1.4 Changed Contextual Demands for Teleworkers 10 2.2 Job Demands-Resources Model 11 2.3 Self-Determination Theory 12 2.3.1 Basic Psychological Needs 14 2.3.2 Self-Determination In the Workplace 15 2.3.3 Supporting Needs Satisfaction 16 Needs-Supportive Job Characteristics 16 Needs-Supportive Leadership 17

3 Methodology 18 3.1 Methodological Approach 18 3.1.1 Research Paradigm 18 3.2 Research Process 18 3.2.1 Literature Review 18 3.2.2 Shaping the Purpose and Problem Formulation 19 3.3 Data Collection 19 3.3.1 The Timing of Interviews 19 3.3.2 A Qualitative Approach Was Used 20 3.3.3 Semi-Structured Interviews as Primary Data Collection 20 3.3.4 Finding a Sample Group 20 3.3.5 Interview Guide 21 3.3.6 Conducting Interviews 21 3.3.7 Challenges With the Interviews 21 3.3.8 Reliability and Validity 22 3.4 Data Processing and Analysis 22 3.4.1 Primary Data Analysis 22 3.4.2 Data Processing 22 3.4.3 Secondary Data Analysis 23

3.5 Ethics and Sustainability 23

4 Results and Analysis 25 4.1 Participant Distribution 26 4.2 Challenges to Social Interactions 27 4.2.1 Spontaneous Interactions Between Coworkers 27 4.2.2 Manager Views of Spontaneous Social Interactions 28 4.2.3 Organizational Tactics for Stimulating Social Interaction 28 4.2.4 Individual Tactics for Stimulating Social Interaction 29 4.3 Transparency in the Digital Organization 30 4.4 Work-Life Balance 31 4.4.1 Boundaries Between Private and Work Lives 31 4.4.2 Loss of Managerial Control 32 4.4.3 Employees Work Longer Hours 32 4.4.4 Task Planning 33 4.4.5 Rituals 33 4.5 Employee and Management Experience a Responsibility Shift 34 4.5.1 Employee Perceptions of Employer Support 34 4.5.2 Manager Expectations on Employees 35 4.5.3 Junior Employees Suffer From Perceived Lack of Clarity 35 4.6 Reaching Out To Colleagues 35 4.6.1 Booking Meetings for Everything 36 4.6.2 Written Communication Increases Clarity 36 4.6.3 Writing Formally is Taxing 37 4.6.3 Written Communication is not for Everyone 37 4.6.4 Issues with Availability 38 4.7 Challenges of holding Digital Meetings 39 4.8 Motivation in the Workplace, what did I learn? 41 4.8.1 Second Wave of the Pandemic Leads Thoughts Into the Future 41 4.8.2 The Difficulties of Remote Work 41 4.8.3 Learning for the Future 42 4.9 Discussion 43 4.9.1 Work-Life Balance 43 4.9.2 The Importance of Organizations facilitating Social Interactions 44 4.9.3 Whose Responsibility is “it”, anyway? 44 4.9.4 The Power of Transparency 45 4.9.4 Reaching out to each other 46 4.9.5 Challenges of holding Digital Meetings 46 4.9.7 What did I learn? 47

5 Conclusion 48 5.1 Connection to Research Questions 48 5.2 Recommendations for Managers 51 5.3 Recommendations for Individual Employees 52

References 53

6 Appendices 56 6.1 Interview Questions 56

1 Introduction

In this section we walk through the contextual background to this project and present a problematization of the subject we have identified. We then define the purpose of the study as well as the research questions that have guided the research. The section is concluded with necessary delimitations, and finally some notes on the contribution we hope to make with this research.

1.1 Background Teleworking, or telecommuting, is defined as “the activity of working at home, while communicating with your office by phone or email, or using the internet” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020) - a concept popularized during the CoViD-19 pandemic, where a large part of the World entered societal lockdowns, “a situation in which people are not allowed to enter or leave a building or area freely because of an emergency”, of varying degrees.

Using teleworking in this way was anticipated by Lister & Harnish (2011), who stated that telework could be used to prevent or circumvent flu pandemics. This scenario is no longer a hypothetical, as the concept is becoming increasingly common during the pandemic. Sostero et. al (2020) state that a third of the European population was teleworking in August of 2020; before the so called second wave of the pandemic. Due to the level of uncertainty about the immediate future being high, previous barriers preventing a widespread implementation of teleworking have been toppled, at least temporarily. With teleworking now being encouraged by authorities, it is up to organizations to cope with the changes that this poses for them.

One of these changes is the individual workplace contexts that the employees are subject to. As offices close, individuals now face challenges in setting up a workplace environment in their homes. As we will show in this study, introducing teleworking has been shown to have an effect on employee productivity, with conflicting findings regarding whether it increases or decreases when compared to an office baseline.

On one hand, a Japanese study conducted within the pandemic context has shown productivity to be lower after switching to teleworking (Morikawa, 2020). Bloom et. al. (2015), instead showed that productivity went up when teleworking, and that it increased even further when teleworking was a voluntary decision by the employees, albeit outside of the pandemic context. In an interview conducted in 2020, Bloom stated that his work was not representative for the pandemic context, inviting further studies into the topic.

There is a strong relation between employees levels of motivation and positive outcomes on an organizational level, including productivity (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017). With knowledge of this, it is in the interest of every organization to strive towards having motivated coworkers. Previous research has identified how multiple aspects of work life, ranging from the design of individual tasks, communication proficiency, the role of leadership, and much more, can impact the motivational levels of employees (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017).

Previous studies have, however, been mainly focused on motivation in physical offices, or organizations where teleworking has been a minor feature. In an era of mass-teleworking, important

questions emerge regarding how motivation can be safe-guarded when organizations are faced with dramatic change.

1.2 Purpose Organizations have been taken by surprise by the pandemic, and the shift towards teleworking was necessarily rushed. There is much know-how when it comes to structuring organizations in an office, but less so when it comes to structuring the work of sometimes thousands of single person home offices. To know what effect the currently adopted ways of teleworking have on employee motivation, and in turn what can be done to increase it, there needs to be thorough empirical research of how employees are experiencing teleworking. This will be the focal point of this thesis. The purpose of this thesis is to provide an understanding of motivation in the context of company wide teleworking schemes by discovering the challenges and opportunities that individual employees have encountered in their experience of teleworking.

1.3 Research Question Given the description of the purpose of this thesis as stated above, we have formulated the following research question to guide our research.

“How does enforced teleworking affect employee motivation in highly skilled, knowledge intensive Swedish organizations?”

To answer this question, three sub-questions are asked: 1. What are the main challenges and opportunities for sustaining motivation during enforced teleworking, as presented by employees and managers? 2. What can managers do to facilitate motivation during enforced teleworking? 3. What can individual employees do to facilitate motivation during enforced teleworking?

1.4 Delimitations

We have delimited our research to cover only Swedish organizations. The main reason for this is that the scope of this study does not incorporate variability in culture that may affect attitudes towards teleworking in different countries, or deeper concepts like work ethic or the importance of work. There might also be structural differences such as levels of digitalization and general technical know-how that might affect how people view teleworking. Furthermore, countries differ both in how hard the pandemic has hit them, as well as how national governments have reacted to it. Limiting the study to one country diminishes these possible variabilities.

We have also chosen to delimitate which types of organizations that are a part of this study. As reflected in the research question we will cover organizations that meet the requirements of being knowledge intensive. We use the definition of this term as described by Alvesson (2011, p.6), “There is an emphasis on knowledge-intensive operations, as opposed to labour-intensive or capital-intensive. Human capital is the dominant factor in knowledge-intensive firms”. The main reason for this delimitation is to narrow the range of companies looked at. Some companies are not able to become teleworking due to the nature of their business, other companies will not have to realign their ways of

working in any major ways. We see that knowledge intensive organizations will be an appropriate type of companies to perform the study on, as well as provide some clarity to the scope of the thesis.

1.5 Contribution This study contributes with a different angle on motivation in the teleworking context, a characteristic of which is that entire organizations have turned to teleworking. This will be an important difference from most previous research that has viewed teleworking as a marginal element of otherwise physically collocated organizations. Such research considers aspects of differences between remote and office workers which becomes irrelevant when the entirety of the office is distributed.

We also hope that the empirical results of this study will provide a richer understanding of how employees experience teleworking. This knowledge can give a better grasp of what aspects of teleworking have the largest impact on motivation, and serve as a basis for further research into how motivation can be best facilitated in the teleworking context.

For practitioners in organization we hope to provide a set of practical guidelines, based on the results we gather, which can be instructive for companies that are structuring their teleworking practises. For this reason, we hope that this study will have a high relevance both for academic purposes as well for practitioners in organizations.

2 Theoretical Framework This section presents the theoretical framework constructed in this study. It contains a compilation of previous studies of teleworking and its empirical results. Further it presents the theoretical models of Job Demands-Resources, and Self-Determination theory. Lastly, applications of Self-Determination theory to the context of the workplace is covered.

2.1 Teleworking

2.1.1 Teleworking and Productivity There are conflicting findings with regard to the effect that teleworking has on productivity. Various studies have looked into the business impacts, showing that telework can increase organizational productivity due to improvements in flexibility, employee productivity, larger talent pools, and reduced healthcare costs from using telework instead of sick leave. (Bloom et. al., 2015; Seejeen Park & Yoon Jik Cho, 2020)

Teleworkers usually demonstrate a lower absentee rate, as they can continue to work from home even when they are sick and experience lower levels of stress because they manage their own work schedule. Bloom et. al. also go on to show that employee attrition and following turnover was reduced by 50% and that employee work satisfaction increased, compared to a control group, when implementing teleworking in a Chinese telemarketing firm.

Bloom et al. (2015) found an average increase of productivity among all workers and that the productivity gain was amplified by a factor 1.5 in a follow-up study that allowed all employees the freedom to choose whether to work from home. These findings are corroborated by Anderson,

Kaplan, and Vega (2015), who state that there are individual characteristics that influence the affective well-being of employees in a teleworking context.

Gorlick (2020) references Bloom et. al. when he states that the pandemic has four key characteristics that make the study inapplicable in the CoViD-19 context, namely children, space, privacy, and choice. Other practitioner studies have corroborated this claim, that teleworking during the CoViD-19 pandemic has led to lower employee productivity. (Morikawa, 2020) Bloom et al. make the case that the autonomy, or the choice, of working from home represents a large part of the reason for the productivity gain, contextualizing the initial findings.

In conclusion, teleworking can increase organizational commitment because employees feel more committed to the organization when they are allowed to work more flexibly compared to a traditional office setting work environment. However, being forced into a different way of working can offset this effect.

2.1.2 The Teleworking Workplace The characteristics and dynamics of work change in the teleworking setting. When teleworking, Greer & Payne (2014) make the case that employees have to deal with changes on different boundary levels, where a boundary is defined as “a means of simplifying and ordering the environment” (Ashforth, Kreiner, & Fugate, 2000, p. 474.) Namely, the temporal, physical, and psychological boundaries. Analyzing these boundaries is key to understanding how the working context changes during telework, as the reshaping of these boundaries are going to have an impact on the job boundaries in forcing every employee to engage in “job crafting”.

Job Crafting Job crafting is defined as changing the boundaries and conditions of job tasks and job relationships and of the meaning of the job (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Through the practice, employees can change the boundaries of tasks, relationships, and meaning of their work. This means changing how work is carried out, with whom to interact in facilitating task completion, and ascribing personal meaning and significance to their work. (Berg et al., 2008)

Job crafting is associated with higher levels of motivation, due to satisfying the psychological needs posed by self-determination theory, as well as higher employee engagement. (Bakker & Oerlemans, 2019) Tims and Bakker (2010) connect this heightened sense of motivation to increasing available job resources and the tweaking of the job demands.

Engaging in job crafting has been observed in successful teleworkers, who apply strategies to increase their performance in the workplace. Among these are conscious efforts to being accessible, extra productive, flexible but scheduling, communicating with coworkers, supervisors and family, preparing the home environment for work, adopting a work-oriented mindset, setting work goals and priorizations, using advanced technology, and, lastly, using dedicated childcare during “office” hours. (Seejeen Park & Yoon Jik Cho, 2020) Bakker and Oerlemans go on to state that the task of job crafting is a consuming one and associated with energy depletion, preventing the completion of other tasks.

2.1.3 Challenges of Teleworking As presented in the previous sections, teleworking is not a unanimously praised work form. Literature presents many challenges that need to be addressed in order for teleworking to yield positive results. Some of these difficulties are due to the employee having to adapt to changes in their work.

Psychological Challenges From a psychological perspective, people create different thinking, behavioural, and emotional patterns that are appropriate for their domains. Depending on role and context, people tend to showcase different attitudes and behaviours. Switching between these contexts is associated with a psychological cost. (American Psychological Association, 2020) Mental preparation is necessary for these transitions, and traditional office work implies a “switching ritual” in the commute. This could potentially lead to extra stress as home office life often has these roles intersect. (Seejeen Park & Yoon Jik Cho, 2020)

Physical and Temporal Challenges Physically, there is the difference of co-workers no longer working in the same location at the same time. The beginning and end of the workday become more fluid and that changes the time that employees are available for family and co-workers. From this dispersion arise communication challenges that can be damaging for more collaborative work efforts, as well as experienced isolation from the co-workers.

Furthermore, Greer & Payne (2014) report a potential lack of developmental opportunities for the teleworker, as the frequency of interaction with co-workers goes down. Golden et al. (2008) state that teleworkers feel a lack of work-related information and that their decision making suffers lower quality, a claim corroborated by Dahlstrom (2013), highlighting a lack of awareness of internal organizational issues. When managers telework, their employees report receiving less feedback, having lower workloads, lower job satisfaction, and an increased turnover intention (Golden & Fromen, 2011). Gorlick (2020) also states that a prolonged lack of social interaction is likely precarious to the psyche, and risks leading to a future mental health crisis, as well as a loss of innovation.

These issues can, however, be countered by supervisory proficiency in telework. This proficiency includes navigating a changed social context, where face-to-face interaction, interdependency of teamwork, performance management, lack of work-related resources, and distractions in the home environment are defined as key challenges to combat. (Seejeen Park & Yoon Jik Cho, 2020)

2.1.4 Changed Contextual Demands for Teleworkers Observed in the teleworking research is a change in job characteristics with increased autonomy in the planning of work; the when, the how, and the what. This is reflected in increased demands posed on employees as well as managers, where the prior has to take an increased responsibility for carrying out work and has to compensate for the lack of communication and the latter has to accept a lower sense of control.

Successful teleworking employees make use of advanced communication technology, child management practices, and adapt their performance mindset by setting higher standards for accessibility, goal setting, and end result (Seejeen Park & Yoon Jik Cho, 2020). For managers,

teleworking proficiency is associated with higher productivity. While Greer and Payne (2014) report a lack of developmental opportunities when working from home, we argue that the characteristics of development are different. The presented studies show that the skill set needed for a worker or a manager to perform changes drastically when going from office to home office, demanding the development of new competencies; technical, physical, and mental.

In the challenges section, we see communication challenges, increased flexibility with regard to work hours, isolation from coworkers and a reported lack of awareness in internal organizational issues. A lowered frequency of colleague interaction is damaging to mental health and a, generally, lower sense of relatedness.

Observed are changes to the demands posed on and the resources available to the employees. Previous research into employee motivation and perceived strain of work has connected organizational outcomes to these two processes. The following sections present the Job Demands-Resources Model and the Self-Determination Theory as means of analyzing effects of work context changes and its effect on motivation, drawing a meta-framework for analyzing the motivation of workers in the CoViD-19 induced home office.

2.2 Job Demands-Resources Model The Job Demands-Resources model was first proposed by Bakker (2003) as a way of evaluating stress in the workforce and is applicable in human resource management. It is based on the assumption that every occupation has its own specific risk factors that can be classified into either one of two categories, demands or resources. Inherent in the model are two psychological processes that play a role for strain and motivation in the work.

The first process, health impairment from demands, has poorly designed jobs with work overload and chronically high emotional demands exhaust the mental and physical resources of the employee, eventually resulting in a breakdown. (Demerouti et al., 2000, 2001; Leiter, 1993; Hockey, 1993) Job demands are the psychological, emotional, physical, social, etc. efforts or skills that need to be exerted when fulfilling one’s work description. The fulfilment of these demands are associated with previously mentioned psychological and/or physical costs. The higher effort required to meet the demands, the higher the risk of these turning into job stressors or strain. (Meijman, & Mulder, 1998)

Figure 1. Job Demand-Resources Model

The second process assumes that resources are inherently motivational in that it fosters growth, learning, development, or helps achieve work goals. (Bakker, 2007) These resources refer to the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the job that are functional in achieving work goals, reduce job demands and the associated costs, or stimulate personal growth, learning, and development. Resources can be evaluated at different levels of the organization, from the organization at large and down to the task level. (Bakker, 2008) This motivational potential comes from the resource’s ability to fulfill the basic human needs stipulated by self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

2.3 Self-Determination Theory Self-Determination theory, SDT, by Ryan and Deci (2000), builds on previous theories of motivation distinguishing two different types of motivation, intrinsic and extrinsic. The former refers to performing activities as a result of finding them inherently interesting and satisfying, whereas the latter entails engaging in activities that are satisfying as a result of their extrinsic consequences (Gangé & Deci, 2005).

SDT, details a complex landscape of different types of motivation, drawing on a central distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation. Autonomous motivation refers to engaging in an activity volitionally, whereas controlled motivation entails a sense of being pressured to engage in an activity. This is to say that autonomous motivation is more intrinsically regulated, whereas controlled motivation is more extrinsically regulated.

SDT uses the concept of internalization, which is defined as “taking in values, attitudes, or regulatory structures, such that the external regulation of a behaviour is transformed into an internal regulation and thus no longer requires the presence of an external contingency” (Gangé& Deci, 2005). In SDT the concept of internalization is continuous, meaning that regulation of motivation does not have to be

either external or internal, but that a regulation can be internalized to a higher or lower degree. It is with these assumptions that SDT posits a controlled-to-autonomous continuum.

Figure 2. Self-Determination continuum.

The leftmost point in this continuum (Fig. 2.), amotivation, is by definition not regulated and completely nonintentional. The rightmost point, intrinsic motivation, is when motivation is inherently autonomous and completely intrinsically motivated. This type of motivation requires that the activity in question is interesting and provides enjoyment detached from any extrinsic consequences it may have. It is the area of extrinsic motivation that the distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation and the concept of internalization most useful.

Beginning with the two leftmost types of extrinsic motivation, external regulation and introjected regulation. The former is when uninteresting activities are initiated and maintained by factors external to a person. For example, “Working only because one’s boss is watching”, implicitly assumes that working is necessary to avoid negative consequences, captures the idea of the concept. Introjected regulation needs a level of internalization, where the regulation is taken in by a person but the regulation functions in a controlling manner. This can be the result of ego-involvement, where the regulation is pressuring a person to behave in certain ways so as to not lose their sense of self-worth. Both of these types of regulation are controlling.

The two rightmost types in the continuum exhibit even greater levels of internalization. Identified regulation motivates a person to perform certain behaviours because they are congruent with the person’s goals and values. An activity can be felt to reflect aspects of who we are and who we want to be. Doing charity work, for example, can be motivated by seeing a value in such activities, which can maintain the behaviour even though it may not in and of itself be interesting. Integrated regulation is the highest level of internalization, according to SDT. Such behaviours are maintained by being central to one’s identity and connected to one’s sense of self, i.e. being self-determined.

What differentiates integrated regulation from wholly intrinsic motivation is that the motivation is not characterized by a person’s interest in the activity, but rather the sense that the activity is instrumentally important on a personal level (Gangé & Deci, 2005). These two regulations, together with intrinsic motivation, is what constitutes autonomous motivation.

SDT postulates that the underlying regulatory processes of autonomous versus controlled motivation will differ, but also that the accompanying experiences too will differ in meaningful ways (Gangé & Deci, 2005). Empirical results have shown that greater levels of internalization, i.e. more autonomous motivation have many advantages, such as more behavioral effectiveness, greater volitional persistence, enhanced subjective well-being, and better assimilation of the individual within social groups (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

For organizations, enabling employees to internalize the regulation of their motivation to work, becomes an obvious imperative as it is likely to improve their performance and well-being. To achieve that, one must understand the variables that support or thwart internalization.

2.3.1 Basic Psychological Needs A fundamental assumption of SDT is that humans are naturally active (Deci & Ryan, 2000). This is to be understood as humans being naturally inclined towards development and being drawn towards activities that support growth and development, i.e. they are intrinsically motivated to perform such activities. These tendencies can be supported or thwarted depending on whether they are provided with certain nutriments to function. These nutriments are postulated as three universal human needs; namely the ones of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

The levels of motivation displayed are contextual, where one feels less motivated in situations where the enabling of one or more of these needs is thwarted. So interest in a particular activity will depend on whether a person experiences that their needs are being satisfied whilst engaging in the activity.

The suggestion that the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are universally applicable has not been uncontroversial, especially the need for autonomy, which has been suggested to be a Western phenomenon not present in every culture (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). There is however empirical support backing the suggestion that autonomy is universal (Chirkov et al., 2003), the key being understanding autonomy not as synonymous with individualism, but rather as the sense of volition in enacting one’s behaviours.

Autonomy is defined as having an “internal perceived locus of causality” (deCharms, 1968), meaning that a person must experience their behaviour as self-determined. Feelings of autonomy therefore involve feeling like the origin of one's behaviours. The idea of autonomy as a necessary nutriment for intrinsic motivation has been supported by research of events that decrease autonomy by moving the perceived locus of causality outside of the person. Events like threats (Deci & Cascio, 1972), surveillance (Lepper & Greene, 1975), evaluation (Harackiewicz et al., 1984), and deadlines (Amabile et al., 1976) were shown to lead to decreased intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, providing choice (Zuckerman et al., 1978) and acknowledging people’s inner experience (Koestner et al. 1984) was shown to increase intrinsic motivation.

Competence is a need to feel effective and a possibility to grow. People want to feel that they have the resources and skills to complete the daily tasks they face successfully. It has been observed that socio-contextual events such as feedback, communication, and rewards, to conduct toward feelings of competence during action can enhance intrinsic motivation for that action. Competence does however not enhance intrinsic motivation unless it is also accompanied by a feeling of autonomy. Developmental efforts to create a perception of autonomy and competence in a social context are therefore typically a precursor for intrinsic motivation. (Reeve, 1996)

Relatedness, too, is connected to intrinsic motivation, where studies on infants show that security and maternal autonomy support show higher degrees of exploratory behaviour (Frodi, Bridges, & Grolnick, 1985), studies in children show that adults not acknowledging the task performance interesting to the child resulting in lower intrinsic motivation (Anderson, Manoogian, & Reznick, 1976), and Ryan and Grolnick (1986) observed lower intrinsic motivation in students that interpreted their teachers as cold and uncaring.

Autonomy and competence have been found to be the most impactful influences on intrinsic motivation, but relatedness is still crucial. Deci & Ryan says: “a secure relational base appears to provide a needed backdrop—a distal support—for intrinsic motivation, a sense of security that makes the expression of this innate growth tendency more likely and more robust“ (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Whether these needs are supported or thwarted in a particular context can be studied empirically, offering a way to examine which aspects of the context have a positive or negative effect on the satisfaction of needs. This means that in a workplace context, conclusions can be drawn about organizational measures that facilitate the internalization of employee motivation and the positive outcomes that entails in a particular context.

2.3.2 Self-Determination In the Workplace

Applying the self-determination theory to understand the workplace is not a novel idea. The Basic Model of Self-Determination Theory in the Workplace (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017) sketches out the way SDT has most commonly been applied to workplace contexts. It is a useful conceptualization of the variables that affect, and are affected by, different levels of motivation.

It uses primarily two sets of independent variables, workplace context and individual differences. Workplace context variables of interest have been the way in which organizations support or thwart employee needs. This often connects to how managerial styles differ and what consequences this has on needs satisfaction. A common variable for understanding individual differences is employees' general causality orientations, which have been described as “relatively enduring, trait-like characteristics reflective of an individual's belief about their ability to promote or cause change” (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In other words, causality orientations are individual differences in people’s tendencies toward self-determined behaviour.

For the purposes of this study, the workplace context variables are of the most interest, as the context of interest is born out of a situation where companies have been forced to work exclusively from home, creating a novel context that has not been studied in great detail.

Mediating variables can be either the satisfaction or frustration of needs, or the self expressed level of autonomous versus controlled motivation. Given that specific aspects of jobs and organizations have a direct impact on needs satisfaction, this study is mainly focused on identifying these aspects and examining the effect they have on needs.

Dependent variables have tended to be of two types, either focused on work related performance or on aspects of health and well-being. Performance variables can include the quality or quantity of work performed, which is often measured in terms of economic outcomes of a group or an entire company.

Health and wellness variables relate to the well-being of employees, measured in terms of levels of burnout, self-expressed job satisfaction and commitment.

Fig. 3. Basic Self-Determination Theory model in the workplace

In “Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science”, Deci, Olafsen, and Ryan (2017) present a comprehensive and recent overview of research of Self-Determination Theory in the context of the workplace. It gathers results supporting the theoretical suggestion that employees reporting high levels of autonomous motivation had multiple positive consequences such as less burnout, work exhaustion, and turnover intention, as well as greater work satisfaction, work commitment, and performance.

Studies looking to use satisfaction of the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as predictors found that satisfaction of all three led to less exhaustion, less organizational deviance, greater enjoyment of their jobs, and more autonomous motivation. In a meta-analysis (Van den Broeck, 2016) it was found that looking at just satisfaction for each of the three needs could predict intrinsic motivation and well-being, but that it was better at predicting positive outcomes as opposed to negative. It is suggested by Van den Broeck that both satisfaction and thwarting of needs should be used as predictors of work-related outcomes. Studies looking at frustration of needs or frustration and satisfaction of needs also found that frustration of needs led to lower levels of well-being and vice versa.

It is well-founded to suggest that satisfying the basic human psychological needs in the context of work has a positive effect on outcomes, both in terms of performance and well-being. This, in turn, begs the question of what actions or adjustments can be made from an organizational perspective in order to support the satisfaction of employee needs.

2.3.3 Supporting Needs Satisfaction

Needs-Supportive Job Characteristics As mentioned above, certain characteristics of jobs can be frustrating for a person's need for autonomy. Events like evaluations and deadlines are not always possible to avoid, and tasks that are assigned will not always be inherently enjoyable. Research has shown, however, that when the rationale for doing the task is clear and accepted, and when we see a sense of purpose in what we are

doing, we can still feel a sense of volition i.e. autonomy (Rigby & Ryan, 2018). This means that jobs that provide clear rationales for tasks, and impart purpose are supportive of autonomy.

In order to have a sense of competence, employees must feel that they have the resources to perform tasks assigned to them. This means that in order to support the need for competence, tasks must be designed at an appropriate level of difficulty, as well as provide the resources needed to perform the task, in order to not produce anxiety and disengagement. (Deci, 1975) People also have a natural wish to improve or master the skills that they use in their daily work tasks. Providing employees with a path forward that leads them to new challenges and responsibilities, makes them anticipate growth in their work, and satisfies their need for competence (Rigby & Ryan, 2018).

Meeting the human need for relatedness requires that organizations provide their employees with a feeling that they belong. This means allowing employees to connect and not allowing situations where people feel isolated. In the workplace, a need for relatedness entails feeling respected, valued, and included by direct managers, coworkers, and leadership (Rigby & Ryan, 2018).

Needs-Supportive Leadership Much of the research on how organizations can be needs-supportive have been focused on the perception of leaders as supportive of needs. The experience of one’s direct manager has been found to be one of the most influential factors determining levels of motivation and engagement. When managers are perceived as supportive of basic needs, their subordinates report higher motivational quality, organizational loyalty, and engagement. (Rigby & Ryan, 2018).

Much of the research of managerial styles have been focused on levels of autonomy support from managers (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017). Having an autonomy-supportive managerial style can be defined “in terms of understanding and acknowledging the subordinates’ perspectives, encouraging self-initiation, minimizing pressures and controls, and providing relevant information” (Gangé & Deci, 2005). The latter two aspects could be broken down further into variables such as, offering choices, providing meaningful feedback, making assignments optimally challenging, and giving a rationale for tasks that are given (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017). Studies from a wide array of working contexts such as police officers (Otis & Pelletier, 2005), health professionals (Moreau & Mageau, 2012), teachers (Nie et al., 2015), and others, show positive outcomes including more autonomous motivation as an effect of autonomy support.

In the context of educational institutions, it has been shown that team leaders who are more needs-supportive, allow educators to internalise the value of their work efforts and become more autonomously motivated. This had the auxiliary effect of improving performance and promoting well-being as well as work satisfaction (Orsini, 2020)

Supportiveness of all three basic needs have been studied as a composite, but most studies have focused on the aspect of autonomy supportiveness. It has been found, however, that the organizational and managerial support for autonomy, supports the satisfaction of all three basic psychological needs at a general level and that they are highly correlated (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017). This means that autonomy support is a good proxy for general needs support.

To summarize, there are many results showing that psychological needs can be actively supported from an organizational level. One of the most influential factors that determine the level of perceived

supportiveness from the organization is the actions of direct managers. This means that the role of leadership is a crucial component for supporting the psychological needs of employees.

3 Methodology This section aims to describe how the study was conducted, the epistemological and ontological stance, and the decisions made throughout the process. It will cover the data collection and its design as well as describe the process of analysing the data.

3.1 Methodological Approach

3.1.1 Research Paradigm In the early stages of this project we settled on using a qualitative approach. We came to question this choice at certain points during the project, especially as we incorporated self-determination theory into our theoretical framework, since it is a robust framework that lends itself to quantitatively driven deductive research. It was through continuous discussion of the subject area and the purpose of the research question that we came to conclude that the most suitable approach would be an exploratory one. The motivation for this was that we were not interested in deductively testing particular theories of motivation to confirm their validity, but rather use the existing theory as a framework, or lens, with which to analyse our findings. The findings in turn are hoped to be an in-depth understanding of the novel context of the home office.

To grapple with the subjective nature of motivation, we adopted an interpretivist approach which rejects acquired knowledge as objectively determined (Carson et al., 2001, p.5). Even though Self-Determination Theory can be argued to make certain claims to objectively describe the process of motivation, such as the universal relevance of basic human psychological needs, the fulfillment of these needs are subject to multiple realities that are difficult to interpret in terms of a fixed reality (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

This interpretivist view holds the ontological stance that there is no single external reality and that it is not possible for the researchers to gain access to such a real world (Hudson & Ozanne, 1988). It follows from this an epistemological stance that the knowledge we can and wish to seek is the perceived knowledge of subjective experience and the specific context it exists in (Carson et al., 2001).

3.2 Research Process

3.2.1 Literature Review The literature review was guided through a series of talks with informants representing different points of view. We talked to leadership development educators, self-leadership researchers, and a C-suite manager of people and culture in one of the participating companies of the study. Through these interviews, we understood that there was a keen interest in understanding the tenets of motivation in the home office, as well as a thirst for knowledge about the effects on the post-CoViD workplace.

The literature review aggregated knowledge from motivational theory, teleworking, and leadership found on the Web of Science and Google Scholar to find accessible versions of the papers. Teleworking, distance working, and home office were used interchangeably in the search terms to identify papers of interest through aggregated searches.

We rated the articles found independently, and articles were discarded based on the synthesized classifications, from A to C, of the paper abstracts. The papers that fit were read, after which the sources relevant to this study were analyzed in a “snowballing” fashion, leading to the framework presented in chapter 2.

3.2.2 Shaping the Purpose and Problem Formulation A research proposal was sent out to HR managers of fifteen Swedish companies, inviting them to partake in an interview study of motivation in the home office. Every participating company was invited to a 30 minute presentation of the research outline and discussion of the practicalities of performing interviews. At the end of each presentation, the HR manager was asked whether there were potential angles of research that were of particular interest for their company.

Upon request, a preliminary draft of the interview guide, as seen in appendix 6.1, was then sent out to allow companies to gauge any potential risks in partaking, and gain necessary approval from within the company. The HR managers were instructed not to share any of the material given to them with persons selected for interviews, so as to not force any perspectives or preconceived ideas on them. No company made objections, or suggested any changes to be made to the interview questions.

The topic of motivation and productivity in the remote working context and the ramifications this epoch in history will have on the workplace of the future are of particular interest. The purpose of this study then shaped into drawing learnings from employee experiences of teleworking to guide the HR practices of tomorrow.

3.3 Data Collection

3.3.1 The Timing of Interviews To meet our timeline we performed the data collection with interviews held throughout the month of November. Given the possibility to perform a continuing data collection over some period of time could potentially generate deeper insights into which aspects of teleworking that stands out, as well as capture any changes in attitude towards teleworking amongst employees.

A complicating factor of this approach is the fact that the proximate cause of the current teleworking paradigm is the society wide lockdowns following CoViD-19. This has meant for companies that the transition to teleworking has been abrupt. Most companies may still be adapting to the new situation and the sudden change can in and of itself have an effect on employees motivation. The temporal location of the study may therefore be of consequence, where one would expect different results depending on whether the study was conducted one month or one year into the lockdown induced teleworking. Our data collection was performed about 9 months into the lockdown, which we see as ample time for companies to have settled into new ways of working and become accustomed to distance working. For this reason we see that the timing of our data collection can be an appropriate

tool to gauge employee motivation without being overly disturbed by noise in motivational levels from the sudden shift.

3.3.2 A Qualitative Approach Was Used As previously mentioned, multiple companies were included in the data collection in order to produce results more generalizable to the group of workers in knowledge-intensive roles. One approach that we could have taken would be a quantitative data collection which would have given us the ability to gather more data. An issue with this is that the nature of this subject area asks us to understand the inner workings of people, their feelings and thoughts on certain topics. Such information is much harder to probe using quantitative means.

Going into this study, we accept established theories with empirical support explaining the dynamics of motivation, e.g. the frustration or satisfaction of basic human needs. We also have previous results charting out the territory of the workplace and what conditions of a workplace that tend to affect motivation. It is in the topic of teleworking where we encounter mixed results as to what conditions of the home office conspire to heighten or diminish motivation, as well as how these aspects in turn affect motivation. In trying to answer the question: “How does enforced teleworking affect employee motivation in highly skilled, knowledge intensive Swedish organizations?”, we must first discover what novel situations are born from the home office context to then use previous theories to understand what resulting effect this may have for employees.

3.3.3 Semi-Structured Interviews as Primary Data Collection Motivation is a highly subjective phenomenon, which makes it less suited for study using observational data. Interviews on the other hand are used to explore data on understandings, opinions, what people remember doing, attitudes, feelings and the like, that people have in common, making it more suited to our purpose (Collis & Hussey, 2013). Interviews were in this context deemed to be less intrusive than observation and gives us a high level of validity. For these reasons we relied on interviews as the central method for data collection.

Interviews can be more or less structured in their format. Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson (2012, p. 132) suggest that unstructured or semistructured interviews are appropriate in situations where the purpose is to develop an understanding of the interviewees world and the personal constructs used as a basis for his or her beliefs. In our research we also had a theoretical framework providing us with a good baseline for different subjects that we wished to cover in our interviews. For these reasons we saw that a semi-structured approach would be the most suitable as compared to entirely unstructured interviews.

3.3.4 Finding a Sample Group Ultimately, five companies chose to participate in the study. The companies were asked to supply the contact information for at least two teams to allow for participation and subsequent conclusions to be possible on an employee-manager level. The companies represented a variety of sectors; a company in the manufacturing industry, an internet retailer, a technical consultancy, a publishing company, and a media production company.

In the teams studied, the type of work they carried out varied. For the purpose of this study, a company back-office, a board of directors back-office, a sales team, a team of business controllers, a

project management team, and an editorial staff were interviewed. The main commonality of these teams was that their jobs fit the definition of knowledge-intensive work.

The sampling was done through a mixed method of networking and natural sampling, where the HR managers first interviewed for the study were tasked with finding suitable work units to use as objects for the study. Each work unit was considered an object as long as there were employees and managers present to provide perspective on how the work was carried out in their unit. This method does little to provide generalizability, something this study strived to counteract through an amplification of the interview base until saturation of the domain was reached.

3.3.5 Interview Guide The construction of the interview guide was done in two steps. First, the theoretical perspectives and findings presented in section 2 were sorted into different thematic topics. For each topic, a set of relating questions were composed. These were then grouped and condensed into thematic questions until the potential topics had been exhausted. The questions were trialed between ourselves, and further adjustments were made to ensure the amount of questions were appropriate for the planned time slot, as well as to make sure that there was a natural flow of questioning.

We received some material from a company working with leadership training, consisting of a set of challenges and opportunities with remote working expressed by about 100 leaders from a swedish publishing company. This material was condensed into the previously mentioned thematic questions which further informed the question set. This data was used to validate the question set, and the empirical data points had clear connections between leaders stated challenges and opportunities, and the questions posed in the interview guide. Using the expressed views of real life people helped translate the question into tangible concepts that were deemed to be more appropriate than much of the theoretical terms found in literature. The company from which this data was gathered did not take part in the study.

3.3.6 Conducting Interviews The interviews were conducted by means of Zoom, a video conferencing tool that provides recording software. We were both present for all interviews, with one assuming the role of interviewer and the other as responsible for the collection of field notes. As the interviews were being conducted, we were able to read and write to the guiding document, allowing for the note taker to chime in, without disrupting the flow, as the questions went in directions deemed interesting enough to elaborate on. The field notes were then analyzed after each interview, utilizing the key findings to iteratively improve the interview guide.

At the beginning of each interview, conscious efforts were made to make the interviewees feel comfortable with the situation as well as turn on their cameras. Once any technical hiccups had been attended to and resolved, the roles of interviewer and note-taker, and the purpose of the study were explained.

3.3.7 Challenges With the Interviews Using video conferencing tools may have had an impact on the levels of trust felt by the respondents. In some interviews, the interviewee joined the meeting without their web camera turned on. This may have affected the quality of the interview since it was harder to establish a natural conversation

without seeing each other. When this occured the interviewers requested in a gentle manner that the camera be turned on, which was followed in most, but not all, cases.

The fact that the meetings were being recorded can also be an issue affecting trust. Zoom automatically records both video and audio which may have caused some interviewees to be more aware of themselves and the answers they provided. Having their statements on record may possibly have had an added inhibitory effect on answering questions relating to their manager.

3.3.8 Reliability and Validity To assess the robustness and quality of the study, we seek some tools to review the efforts with. There is no consensus for assessing qualitative research (Leung, 2015), however a helpful practise is reviewing the study in terms of reliability and validity.

Validity is here understood in terms of the trustworthiness of the data. Firstly, the data collection was done using semi-structured interviews which allow participants a large degree of freedom to state their feelings and views in depth and with much nuance. To increase validity, interviewers frequently made use of yes-or-no follow-up questions intended to confirm that the interviewers had correctly interpreted their intentions (Leung, 2015). The interviewers also made an effort to relax any uneasiness that the interviewees may have felt in the interview so as to allow them to speak freely. In terms of analysis, we based categories and themes on the content of participants statements rather than pre existing theory, which increases the validity of the work (Grossoehme, 2014).

Reliability refers to the replicability of the study. In the case of semi-structured interviews, exact replicability is not a reasonable ambition. What can be done to increase reliability in research of this nature, is to make sure that the research process has a high level of transparency (Grossoehme, 2014). Striving towards transparency, we were careful to detail the important decision points of the process. The interview guide was also kept up to date and any changes made were added to the guide.

3.4 Data Processing and Analysis

3.4.1 Primary Data Analysis The data was analyzed and discussed after each interview, focusing on the field notes and general reflections made. General reflections were documented to be used as input into the secondary analysis as potential themes. The main purpose of the primary data analysis was, however, to review the interview guide. In some cases the guide was rearranged to give interviews a more natural flow, in other cases questions were added or retracted. The changes to the interview guide was done on an aggregated basis so as not to allow every single interview to redefine the guide, giving it a natural evolution throughout the project.

3.4.2 Data Processing The data was recorded into the Zoom format, providing audio files in an mp4 format. Soundflower was used to convert computer output to input and Google’s automatic speech recognition software transcribed the interviews into text files. The results of this process were deemed insufficient for the secondary analysis. Due to time constraints, it was decided that the field notes were to be used as input into the secondary analysis.

3.4.3 Secondary Data Analysis All field notes were compounded into a master document in Google sheets where each cell contained statements from the field notes. The statements were denoted with the relating name, role, team and company. The neighbouring columns were left empty for codes to be assigned to statements.

All statements in the master document were analysed in multiple iterations where one or more descriptive words were tagged to the statement. The words used were not preconceived, but rather chosen ad hoc to best capture the statements topic. For example, a statement like: “I hate email threads, it is such a slow medium” would be tagged with a word like: “Communication”.

When all statements had been worked through the tags could be accessed by using the filter functions in Google sheets. This allowed us to view the data from many angles, combining different tagged words as well as focusing on a specific company team, or compare employees to managers. Through a process of filtering associated tags, high level themes could be constructed.

Since this analysis was not based explicitly on particular theoretical frameworks, some of the risk of confirmation bias could be alleviated. Instead of trying to force the data into the theoretical framework presented in this study, this method allowed close interaction with the pure data to which the framework could be used as a lense for interpretation.

3.5 Ethics and Sustainability

Several steps were taken to make sure that ethical standards were upheld throughout this project, both in the collection of data through interviews and in the analysis of the collected material. These steps were designed to follow the guidelines of Swedish government agency Vetenskapsrådet’s codex for research ethics (Vetenskapsrådet, 2021).

Every participant was notified of the interviews being recorded and that the recordings would end up being transcribed for use in a study. They were also told that their contributions were anonymous and would not be shared with either colleagues or managers. Finally, it was communicated that any documentation such as video or audio recordings where participants could be personally identified were to be deleted when the project had been completed. Remaining documentation such as transcription were to be completely anonymized.

The companies in the study were told that they would get to read the excerpts of the study before publication, so as to guarantee that no sensitive information about the company or their employees could get into the wrong hands.

A crucial aspect of the analysis was to interpret statements made by participants in order for conclusions to be drawn. A challenge with this process is that researchers run the risk of extrapolating too far from specific statements, attributing thoughts or feelings to interviewees that might be colored by researchers personal biases. This problem is alleviated by presenting many quotes from repondants, and contrasting them with discrepant answers, allowing for a better representation of the data.

Evaluating this project from a sustainability perspective, we conclude that the environmental notion of sustainability is somewhat applicable to our study. Much can be said about the effect of teleworking

on things such as commuting, over-dimensioned office spaces, etc. This is however not a focus point for the study. Social sustainability, and to a lesser extent economical sustainability, are however more central to the scope of the thesis. This study recognizes an association between well-being and motivation, and in turn motivation and economic productivity. With these assumptions this project can help address the areas of social and economic sustainability by potentially allowing for higher levels of well-being for individuals as well as increased economic productivity for companies.

4 Results and Analysis

In this section we present and analyze the findings gathered through interviews. We begin by describing the companies and the individual teams that were interviewed. We then move on to present how attitudes towards teleworking differ in regards to a set of themes that we constructed from the data. Lastly we present a discussion of the cause and effects of certain actions and job situations based on the empirics, and match their alignment to our theoretical framework.

The interviews were conducted between November 11 and November 30 of 2020. Under the first subheading, the distribution of the participants across the teams and industries can be found in table 1. The findings are found following the table, categorized as seven emergent themes. Each theme is presented as a series of subthemes, supported by their corresponding statements or field notes as presented under chapter 3.

4.1 Participant Distribution The 30 participants were distributed over nine teams, with three participants not representing any team. 18 participants were employees and twelve were managers.

Participant Team Role Industry

1 1 Employee Online Retail

2 1 Employee Online Retail

3 - Employee Eolic Energy

4 2 Employee Eolic Energy

5 - Manager Eolic Energy

6 1 Employee Online Retail

7 1 Employee Online Retail

8 3 Employee Online Retail

9 4 Manager Digital Production

10 3 Employee Online Retail 11 2 Manager Eolic Energy

12 2 Manager Eolic Energy

13 5 Employee Industrial Production

14 6 Employee Eolic Energy

15 3 Manager Online Retail

16 2 Employee Eolic Energy

17 2 Employee Eolic Energy 18 1 Manager Online Retail

19 7 Employee Digital Production

20 3 Manager Online Retail

21 8 Employee Political Lobbying

22 7 Manager Digital Production

23 9 Employee Industrial Production

24 4 Manager Digital Production

25 - Manager Eolic Energy

26 5 Employee Industrial Production

27 6 Manager Eolic Energy

28 9 Employee Industrial Production

29 9 Employee Industrial Production

30 8 Manager Political Lobbying Table 1. Participant Distribution

4.2 Challenges to Social Interactions Most people spend a significant part of their lives at an office. Beyond collaborating to solve work related tasks, people interact with their colleagues for purely social reasons. Indeed, for some people the office functions as an important – or even the most important – avenue for social exchange in their everyday life. We find that teleworking has changed the terms for how people are able to interact with their colleagues, which we will showcase in this section.

4.2.1 Spontaneous Interactions Between Coworkers In a traditional office, the coffee machine has come to represent somewhat of a social hub. Colleagues meet there and chat about everything from their work, their weekend plans, to the weather. What the coffee machine chatter, or the equivalent concept of “water cooler gossip”, seems to be a symbol of is the spontaneous social exchange that often occurs in between formalized meetings or individual work. We have found that this form of social interaction is not only difficult to achieve at the home office, but also dearly missed by many.

“I get energy from people, but I don’t get it from the screen. Just chatting by the coffee machine is nice”.

“Those spontaneous moments at the coffee machine. You need those!”

As highlighted by the above quotes, spontaneous moments are valued by employees and serve as a source of energy that does not translate to digital meetings. Digital interactions are also affecting the multifaceted ways in which individuals interact in different constellations. One respondent speaks of how, in the physical office, you might end up next to someone at random during a coffee break. This is yet another spontaneous element of social interaction that is challenged by teleworking.

It’s not just the sharing the details of your weekend plans that is lost, one employee mentions coffee break interactions as a forum for ventilating things that are bothering you, be it something at work, or in its own words: “Lamenting the current situation”.

This emphasizes a type of interaction that might be more challenging when not face to face with others. While this respondent had multiple opportunities to connect with others, he was lacking a social situation that can serve as an outlet for grievances and complaints. Conversations of that nature may perhaps demand more trust and a sense of confidentiality that is harder to achieve digitally.

It does seem like digital meetings lack some of the qualities of in person conversations. A recurring opinion is that short discussions in small groups work better in a physical office, most importantly discussions not directly relevant to a project or work duty. One interviewee said of the physical office that:

“You meet people with things in common with you. There is a social platform and togetherness that is limited at the home office, even with virtual fikas and things like that. People speak on top of one another, so only one person can speak at a time”.

The currently available tools for digitally communicating seem to limit conversations to one person speaking at a time. This is a qualitative difference that can be a challenge especially to informal conversations, breaking their natural flow.

4.2.2 Manager Views of Spontaneous Social Interactions Managers also spoke of coffee machine chatter as both important and missing in digital office spaces. One manager mentioned this type of interaction as necessary for feeling a sense of safety. Another manager pointed to spontaneous social interaction as a way to notice evidence of dysfunction in employees, based on small cues that are harder to identify in a video call, and even less so in a chat. The manager went on to reflect that people have very different life situations, and that for some people the workplace and their colleagues are their only real source of social interaction. People with rich social lives outside of work may be just fine without a rich social environment at the office, but those who have – as the manager put it – the workplace and their colleagues as their only real sources of social interaction risk becoming isolated. This means that the consequences of losing the social avenue of a physical office will be unequally felt by coworkers, depending on their life situations.

One interviewee mentioned overhearing as an aspect lost when working from home, saying that “there is much more that happens on site than what one can manage to get digitally”, explaining that overhearing a conversation and joining in creates a dynamic that is beneficial. There is indeed much more that happens on site that can be of value to an organization, for example, a manager can easily pick up signals of employees struggling.

“It is hard to know how people are on a personal level. When you see your staff it is a lot easier to notice emerging dysfunction”.

For managers, it seems as if the loss of the spontaneous strips them of the ability to easily check in on their employees well-being. This in itself offers a challenge, but the situation is exacerbated by some employees becoming socially isolated, increasing their risk of slipping into dysfunctional habits.

4.2.3 Organizational Tactics for Stimulating Social Interaction We found that coffee room chatter or, more generally, spontaneous social interactions, have been difficult to translate to the teleworking organization. To meet the need for social interaction, many new tactics for creating forums where employees may engage each other on non work related topics have emerged in the teams. These tactics came both as initiatives from an organizational level, or as personal tactics of certain individuals.

From the organizational level, we found that ‘virtual fika’ or virtual coffee breaks have been a common response to the lack of social interaction. It usually entails joining your team in a video conference to take a collective break from working, and chat with your colleagues. The digital ‘after work’ has also been used in some teams. Many showed appreciation for these opportunities to connect, but when asked whether it is possible to achieve a similar sense of togetherness through ways of digital platforms as in the physical setting, many expressed doubts.

“Then you would need virtual reality. A flatscreen is not enough”.

“It is possible to improve existing technologies, but it’s still strange. You can’t look people in the eyes. If we could solve that we would have come a long way”.

Digital platforms were used, often with the explicit purpose of upholding a sense of togetherness, but it was clear that the solutions employed were seldom deemed good enough to compare to physical interaction. This can make it hard for managers to provide social forums that appear attractive to employees. A manager said this about the virtual fikas initiated in the team:

“It is important to keep a continuity in our interactions. It’s easy to let the fika run into the sand. For a time I thought that the digi-fika was not worth it, but I realized that it was important and that we needed to find a way to make it work".

The manager explained that she, herself, found the digital fikas rather silly, and that few people in her team attended initially. She came to the conclusion that they were important after seeing that there was an increase in attendance during the autumn, when pandemic restrictions were sharpened, which she took as evidence of them being a necessity. Another manager suggested that the team should move over to their sofas during the virtual fikas and introduce more fun elements. Many suggested that quizzes, institutionalizing traditions such as ‘culture tip of the week’, or even something as simple as checking in with a personal question like ‘what are your weekend plans’, helped improve the social exchange from virtual fikas.

Beyond break meetings, we encountered some strategies for stimulating social exchange in work meetings as well. A few managers mentioned that, since digital meetings tended to be more time efficient, they could savour a few minutes at the beginning or end of work related meetings for personal conversation or general chit chat. So called ‘walk and talks’ were also mentioned as a way to make meetings more personal.

“I heard from a team in Norway where everyone was ordered out into nature, away from the computer, to show their surroundings. It’s nice to see that ‘My team lives like this’”.

Institutionalization and group wide acceptance of a particular forum for social interaction did not happen overnight, but it did seem like the managers who showed persistence and allowed for creativity had more success in finding ways to make them work.

4.2.4 Individual Tactics for Stimulating Social Interaction The above mentioned interventions were implemented to compensate for lost social interaction, but they can hardly be called spontaneous. Indeed, they demand more effort and planning – usually from a manager – in order to satisfy social needs. The below quotes highlight that employees feel they need to be more proactive in order to communicate things that came naturally when collocated at the office.

“Communicating is an active choice. At the office, things are shared more spontaneously”.

“The cohesion is different, You have to share more about how things are going”.

Several interesting routes for less structured interactions were mentioned. Some people were in the habit of simply calling up a friend, whenever in need of a chit chat.

“I still miss spontaneous interactions. I usually call up my work buddies and terrorize them”.

Another remedy for lack of spontaneity came from an employee that was in the habit of setting up a video meeting with some colleagues, that was left on in the background. Whenever someone encountered a problem to discuss, or just felt like talking, they could unmute their microphones and do so.

Lastly, there are the different channels for chats that are utilized. Many teams had a chat for the entire team that was informal enough to allow for jokes and GIFs to be shared with others. Some people also

had private chats with one or more close work friends. When asked about the team cohesion, one employee answered: “Cohesion is good. You can feel it in the chat”.

Remarks like these should not be disregarded. It speaks of the possibility of creating a strong sense of cohesion by means of chats, without constant in-person contact.

4.3 Transparency in the Digital Organization One of the findings was that teams have tended to get more tightly knit during the pandemic. There exists a sense that one's own work and context has been put in the center of attention, with the diffusion of information so often shared in informal ways not finding an outlet. The connection to the organization seldom stretches beyond the team, increasing the sense of togetherness with the colleagues, while being taxing for the organizational ditto.

At some companies, information used to be mainly promulgated through conversations at the office. This meant that information about things not in the direct scope of an employee’s roles disappeared once they began working from home.

“When you don’t meet others you don’t get the same overview of the situation”.

“Coworkers don’t know what their colleagues do”.

Teams in other companies seemed to manage this better. There were even teams where communication, and in turn cohesion, were experienced to be better than before. This connects to an understanding of how digital tools can be used to communicate. Group chats, meetings norms, and norms for communication are key to creating an atmosphere and a sense of collaboration.

“There is a decent insight into the team by daily communication with all the colleagues, either through the group chat or privately”.

On the upside, the digital shift has created a democratization of the workplace communication. With teams now spread out over several offices in a market area, one’s closest daily interaction could be with a colleague working from a different location. This changed standard of communication means that staff meetings and group interactions no longer suffer from a geographical bias, with some respondents stating that team cohesion is better now than it was before. When everyone works at a distance, efforts to include people are targeted equally to those who used to sit next to each other at one office, as those who used to sit at the other side of the country.

“Many coworkers are saying that there is a better cohesion now than it was before, since everyone is included from a distance”.

“[The other office] is more included now”.

“People are used to the digital ways of working now. Several of the employees talk about how team cohesion is better now than it was before, seeing as everyone is included remotely".

“Before the pandemic, we planned working holiday trips to [remote office]. We would work together physically for a couple of days, before going back to communicating over email until we meet again. Now, we talk every day".

As previously mentioned, the connection to the team happens through a connection of the common work. However, this seldom connects to the common purpose of the organization, with many

respondents reporting that they lack understanding of how they are doing relative to other teams in the company, as well as a social connection to their colleagues in other teams.

“My department has become more tight-knit during this. We are all in the same boat, but you do lose a lot of the connection to other parts of the organization”.

“There is very poor insight into the other groups work. Customer service, orders, etc. I have no idea about what they are doing nowadays”.

How one views themself in relation to the team and the rest of the organization has shifted for some people, in the above examples they have shifted towards a weaker connection. Some people instead find that they feel a stronger connection to the organization as a whole now. One explanation for this was that the organization had introduced new ways of sharing information, which increased transparency and made people feel more a part of the company.

“The CEO has introduced staff meetings, and groups send weekly emails to keep everybody up to date. Anyone can take part of it, wherever they are”.

“There are meetings from high ranking people. I feel more involved now than I did before”.

4.4 Work-Life Balance Work-life balance is “the dilemma of managing work obligations and personal/family responsibilities”, (Lockwood, N. R., 2003) When researching this study, one of the findings was that work moving home affected how time was allocated between the two, and how new difficulties arose as a consequence. These often consisted of new expectations or perceptions of working hours and difficulties dealing with work and private life intersecting. For the respondents without roommates or families living in the same location, work seemed to take up an increased share of the hours of the day.

4.4.1 Boundaries Between Private and Work Lives Some respondents report that there exists a perception of work and private life blending together. The increased flexibility that the home office presents is a blessing for the people predisposed to planning. Some activities of the modern home invite to be done in the background while otherwise busy doing other things, leading to breaks from work including the completion of household chores. Some interviewees expressed that the blurred lines between the two was psychologically taxing.

“It is important to know how to plan your energy levels, but also to know more or less what times you are expected to be available. In my team, we work primarily during office hours".

“I get interrupted by doing laundry and dishes".

“Days where it is easy to rearrange the schedule, working from home is fantastic. Straight from bed and into the meeting. Of course, it becomes harder to separate work and private life".

“You can’t take breaks when working at home. The line between work and private life is constantly blurring".

The lion’s share of work is often done during office hours, with some activities requiring a digital presence at set times and variations of daily start-up meetings reported as common practice. Some

respondents stated that they liked to start their workday as early as five in the AM and others sprinkled in in a bit of late night work before bedtime at 12 AM.

“You have a right to take lunch, but everyone knows that you can call me on Teams, or on the phone if I’m not available there".

“Before, everyone worked office hours. I think it feels good to be able to take a break over lunch and go to the gym. Many in my team accept working into the evening. You feel ‘free’ going to the gym outside of regular visiting hours".

There appears to be different preferences between respondents, as some said that this increased flexibility made life easier. With the home office inviting flexibility in scheduling, it allows for longer working hours. This was especially appreciated by parents of younger children, whose lives were marked with a lower predictability to begin with.

“I leave my computer, phone, and email sometimes. Even if the roles blend together, it is possible to focus on being a good father. You can plan your work rather than your time".

“I have a two-year old that wakes me up at five in the morning. It is nice to be able to adjust my work-flow. Before, I would have had to take half of a day off".

“When the kids come home from school, I spend some time with them before sliding back into work for the rest of the evening".

4.4.2 Loss of Managerial Control In the teams interviewed, the clarity around performance was measured differently. In some, there were clear performance indicators that were easy to follow up on a group and individual level and in others the nature of work made control difficult. We found that managers often said that the performance goals were met and that they hadn’t changed their expectations during the pandemic. Simultaneously, most expressed an understanding that the underlying fundamentals for employee performance had changed.

“We have a higher demand on reports and follow-ups now than we did before, but we don’t really know what to do with them. I do feel, however, that there is a danger in wanting to go in and boss people around. The reports don’t give the whole picture and it is important to listen in and trust that the employees know to do their job".

“Not knowing about everything that goes on in the team is a blessing and a curse. I work a lot with supporting the teams".

“As a leader, you have to work with trust and the belief that the employees have the will to perform".

“I have to trust that everyone takes responsibility, but I don’t have the same control on an individual level. You can’t let one person’s performance affect the whole. As long as the team performance is up to par, it’s good enough".

“Noone has spoken about different expectations. It’s 100% business as usual".

4.4.3 Employees Work Longer Hours For the employees, some felt that they compensated by working longer hours. Many identified that they were indeed working longer hours, but without making the explicit connection to performance. This could imply an employee commitment to performing up to their usual standard, but without having the necessary means to carry out work at the expected level. It could also imply that there are undefined expectations novel to the remote workplace.

“I, personally, have higher expectations on the performance than what they actually are. They [the company] have communicated what is expected, but my personal interpretation is a little bit harder. I’m sure that everyone else works more than I do".

“There are different expectations now. The norms are constantly moving without you even noticing". “It is easier to meet the expectations now, with the flexibility we are offered".

“We know that we can’t expect productivity to be the same, but the expectations on performance are still the same as during office work. Our client deliveries are still important, but we compromise with internal work".

“The expectations from my team are steadily increasing as I get more into the routine. You want to give the impression of being someone that’s always available. You should be marked green on Teams and answer the phone and emails quickly. The latest email I replied to was at 21.30 in the middle of the week. No external pressure, but there’s a nice feeling to be able to check the box right there and then".

4.4.4 Task Planning To counter the lack of clarity that follows in the wake of flexibility, the respondents identify two main strategies. One is to plan their work into tasks rather than time, and the other to create rituals for themselves to separate work and private life. The planning for tasks allows for a sense of structure and accomplishment as well as clarity around what success means.

“It is important to have a clear backlog of things that need to be done in order to maintain productivity. Ad hoc tasks are always going to flow into my day. Prioritizing and adapting is necessary to work away the most important stuff, and the bad conscience, to be able to pick up the spontaneous".

“I have task goals now. At the office, just being there and having a cup of coffee constitutes work".

“Using a Trello backlog for tasks has worked well for those that have tried, so it’s something we are now investigating on a team level".

4.4.5 Rituals With the loss of a ritual separating the two, lowering the psychological barriers that the office represents. This was highlighted by many respondents saying that they had initially appreciated the feeling of going through a workday in their pyjamas, before eventually realizing that the mere act of putting on one’s, not just proverbial, big-person pants in the morning helped set the tone for a productive workday.

“I brush my teeth, have breakfast, and I don’t wear my pyjamas while working".

“Working in pyjamas or having breakfast in front of my computer ‘isn’t very good’. ”

“I dress up to go to work. It feels important to start the day in a ‘serious way’".

While not all participants of the study that reported having a lack of structured rituals to their work felt negatively about working from home, the ones that did had a negative idea of teleworking’s impact on their lives missed the structure of getting up and getting time for themselves during the commute to work.

“Sometimes, I go to my parents’ house to work. There, there are no interruptions and I have a clear separation of work and private life".

“I miss waking up and getting ready to work".

“You don’t get the same closure without the 35 minute bike ride back home after a workday".

Despite commuting being presented as one of the rituals helping to separate the two personas of work and private life, many found that not having to take part in the practice was one of the biggest relievers of stress in daily life.

“I love working from home! Before, I spent two hours every day on going to and from the office, but that time is much better spent on my own things. No morning stress, it is so nice!”

“The time in the car is a nice time for reflection, but one hour one way, tolls, and gas money quickly adds up".

It seems that the ritual of commuting has value to people, but that there might be a limit where a commute too long, or too expensive, will not be worthwhile despite the nice time for reflection described above.

4.5 Employee and Management Experience a Responsibility Shift

4.5.1 Employee Perceptions of Employer Support The respondents were asked about the support given to them by their employers. A majority of the participants highlighted the physical aspects of the home office, as well as the digital infrastructure to enable remote work. Most had been offered help with the physical environment, covering screens, headphones, desks, ergonomic chairs, and the like. The employees reported that they were able to reasonably affect their work situation through dialogue with their managers.

“The digital infrastructure is the most important to make distance work work, as well as the ergonomy when sitting for eight hours every day".

“Support from the employer consists of many practical things, such as bringing home work equipment from the office".

“We already had the digital collaboration tools in place. I didn’t perceive that I received any particular support. Speaking of ergonomy, I went to the store and bought a chair myself".

“We were quickly able to go to the office to pick up our screens, chairs, and desks. A comfortable chair would have been nice to have, but I don’t have ‘the optimal surfaces’ to fit them into my home".

“I feel that whenever I have had concerns or viewpoints to present I have been heard by my closest manager, who has always been very quick to pick it up".

Some of the employers had also started educational initiatives to help employees cope with the psychological stress associated with the change, offering lectures and education on topics related to remote work. These were received as a nice addition to what they already had. However, participation was far from given, with some respondents saying that they were sure the initiatives were appreciated by others but had not attended themselves.

“There are lectures on ergonomy, exercise, social aspects, and psychological well-being in the home office. My perception is that they have been well received by others, but I have not connected to it myself".

“We have had mindfulness workshops and practice, which I feel have done well. What I do miss, however, are the social interactions. It becomes more fun when you do things together".

4.5.2 Manager Expectations on Employees One of the themes presented during the interviews was the one of manager expectations on employee responsibility. The manager perceived lack of control over events has, as noted in a previous section, been compensated for by increased levels of trust. This trust is built on an increased responsibility for the employees to be proactive in their calls for assistance, the carrying out of tasks, and the well-being of themselves as well as others.

“It becomes increasingly important that the employees have a higher degree of self-leadership. They need to find routines to feel and do well. That this is the individual’s responsibility becomes more apparent when working remotely. You can really tell that the ones that don’t become more distant".

“It is important that the employees communicate how they want things, but also that you sometimes force yourself to meet the colleagues’ needs. There is a collective responsibility to make sure that people are doing okay, even if you don’t need it as much as others. I feel that people look to the manager to ‘solve’ group cohesion".

“The employees need to ask themselves ‘what happens inside me when the outside circumstances change?’. As a sole leader, it is impossible to keep track of. People need to assume responsibility for themselves. In general, it seems as if people want more social interactions. We need to get better at promoting the creative ways of getting together that exist digitally".

4.5.3 Junior Employees Suffer From Perceived Lack of Clarity The responsibility for oneself to create the circumstances for success was observed as more natural in more senior employees, with one manager saying that they generally have an easier time expressing their needs, while the younger need a more present leadership to pry out what their needs are.

“The employees have observed the need for clarity and outspoken priorizations. They have stepped up and assumed responsibility and understand that you get to do more things yourself".

“Managers need to lead individuals and listen in on every team member, trying to find the right channels to make sure that everyone feels safe. Leading is more about coaching than bossing now".

“We work more closely with our stakeholders, maintaining an open dialogue to promote understanding for what they need".

This is supported by junior employees disproportionately stating that the boundaries between work and private life blur as presented in a previous section. Clarity around boundaries and expectations, as well as openness in communication between employees and with their managers appears to be key.

“I can see that some have dropped in motivation lately. The openness that we have established has made it easier for us to talk about it and come up with solutions".

“I feel that work and private life are becoming more blurred. It is harder to say where my [private and work] personalities start and end and I feel that I’m becoming less serious in my work. I don’t look forward to Friday anymore. It’s just more of the same.”

4.6 Reaching Out To Colleagues Interaction between colleagues is of course a crucial component of cooperating towards completing various tasks and reaching shared goals. In section 4.3 we showcased responses related to social interactions with the focus on its importance for social cohesion. In this thematic section we will focus on the process of interacting as a necessary means of cooperation.

4.6.1 Booking Meetings for Everything With the help of digital tools there seems to be a myriad of different channels to choose between when communicating with coworkers. In transitioning to teleworking, the relative importance of written and verbal communication has changed in some cases. Below are a few sentences from respondents describing how they used to communicate with colleagues, when it came to small questions that would arise throughout a work day.

“At the office you would just tap them on the shoulder”

“Before, you walked over to the person you needed, now you just call or chat”

“Before, you could walk over to someone and make a judgement call if a proper meeting was necessary. Now you have to book everything in strict time slots”

Having to book a meeting for every single issue that arises is a problem in and of itself, which we describe in more detail in section 4.7. Walking over and ‘tapping someone on the shoulder’ does not directly translate to the digital office, but as alluded in one of the above quotes, it has been substituted with calls and chatting. We find that some teams have seen an increase in written communication.

“Our ways of working haven’t changed much except that communication is now done through text” “It’s a habit to go over and talk to someone. In reality it is easier to get that space [in our chat forum]. Initially it was hard to explain issues in text, but once you get the hang of it everything works better”

Undemanding conversations between colleagues, perhaps sitting next to each other or on another floor in the same building, is not available anymore. As the second quote states, text was hard initially, but now works better. This attitude was not a minority opinion, as we will see below.

4.6.2 Written Communication Increases Clarity The use of digital tools such as Slack or Teams had been frequently used before teleworking in some teams, where other teams had only just begun seriously using them when remote working began. One participant says this about the chats used in her team:

“When small questions and other things come up, you can just throw out the question and get a response almost immediately. It can be hard to orient yourself sometimes, but the communication is almost faster than it was in the office”

Multiple participants pointed out that the response time is faster now than what it used to be. Another point that was raised was that there was a less formal relationship to text, with people being more concise and to the point. Another benefit pointed out to us by some participants is the ease with which one can backtrack written communication to find necessary information.

“Communication is more distinct now. When communicating digitally it is important to keep in mind what is being communicated. Will the information I wish to convey be lost as this makes its way through the organization?”

“Maybe I have improved my communication skills. I am much sharper in the chat, more clear and communicative. There is a focus on backtracking to find earlier information. You can go back and continue from a certain point, asking yourself: ‘What did I miss in this situation?’”

It seems that communicating by text can alleviate the human errors born out of forgetfulness. Having a written record of almost every interaction can be very useful for teams by making the exchange of information more structured.

Of course, when every word ever uttered by a colleague ends up in a chat thread, teams can run the risk of experiencing an information overload. This risk was averted by one manager who shares that she spent more time now using different channels and threads in their digital tool in order to find better structure for communications and making sure that everyone gets to take part of the relevant information. Another manager mentioned that ‘the old guard’, referring to older colleagues, still depended on email to a much larger extent that others.

4.6.3 Writing Formally is Taxing A surge of written text has not been without issues, however, and there were many respondents commenting that written text can be a difficult form of communication.

“It takes a longer time to communicate in text what is usually easy verbally. Internal communication becomes a lot more clear”

“Written communication demands more energy input, but also in the actual interpretation of written language”

“It’s harder to know whether someone understands what you’ve said. Small misunderstandings can lead to frustration”

The fact that information in written form takes more energy, both from the sender and the recipient seems to have affected changes in how it is used in different teams. From a managerial perspective we found that some managers have made an effort to make the most out of digital communication tools like Teams and Slack, and shying away from using email.

“People get too many emails anyway. It is better to lift new concerns on Teams”

“Mail is a slow communication channel”

“We use mail to share information or files, chats are used for questions”

Mail is here disregarded as a slow and clunky tool not well suited for fast paced exchanges or questions that chats can be used for. It seems like chats are a better substitute for the undemanding conversations that used to be commonplace in physical offices.

4.6.3 Written Communication is not for Everyone Far from everyone felt at ease with relying solely on written communication. Some of the teams had a different progression, where they initially wrote to each other, but later gravitated towards calling each other. For some people it has to do with not being comfortable with writing, in other cases, the ability to, for example, share screens via digital tools is a motivating factor for preferring calling.

“I am not so good at expressing myself in text, so I would rather take a meeting on Teams”

“Stress levels have decreased as [the employees] have learnt how to reach out to each other with questions. Initially we chatted, but now we call each other and share our screens”

The second quote is interesting in stating that “employees have learnt how to reach out to each other with questions”. For some the act of asking a question might be more easily done verbally, as sometimes when asking questions, the inquirer may be unsure as to what exactly the problem is. Phrasing a question in words demands a level of preciseness that can be harder to achieve.

One person raises the point that even though written communication is better in some ways, the social value of verbal communication motivates its use.

“There is an advantage to verbal communication when distans working, since it satisfies a need. You do lose clarity in the communication, however”

It should be expected that people will not always opt for the most efficient means of completing tasks as in the above quote. How comfortable a person feels with a certain way of communicating might be the determining factor in choosing whether to text or call.

4.6.4 Issues with Availability The means of communicating with digital tools are definitely available, but there is still no perfect teleworking analogy to ‘tapping on the shoulder’. What is interesting about tapping someone on the shoulder is not that the ensuing interaction is verbal, but in the way in which colleagues approached each other. Social cues helped people understand whether someone had time to discuss an issue or provide support. We find that regardless of how one chose to communicate digitally there were still issues with how to approach coworkers.

“First, you write them in the chat. If the person responds you can call them. You don’t just cold call people”

“You have to ask permission to call someone, but at the [physical] office you can just walk passed them and ask”

Many people expressed that the issue of availability was problematic. Not being certain whether or not a person is at their computer or in the middle of a heated argument with their spouse matters. In the physical office counterpart, seeing your colleague very stressed or upset might cause you to rethink asking them for help and turn to someone else instead.

Many expressed difficulties about whether or not it was appropriate to reach out to someone. Different status icons can be set within digital communication tools, but how they are used and to what level they are respected varies.

“You have a right to take lunch, but everyone knows that you can call me on Teams, or on the phone if I’m not available there".

“You shouldn’t be overly eager when your chasing after someone”

“Respect for Teams and different status icons can make you hesitant to reach out in cases where you would have done so otherwise”

“Sometimes, people answer when they are in a meeting”

“You want to give the impression of being someone that’s always available. You should be marked green on Teams and answer the phone and emails quickly".

People have a tendency to both hesitate about reaching out to others, and at the same time force themselves to be available at all times. The social cues that might work in a physical office, have less impact in the digital.

4.7 Challenges of holding Digital Meetings As alluded to in section 4.6.1, many teams have seen a surge in meetings during their time in the home office. A manager says this about booking meetings:

“It has become more efficient. You book meetings more easily, you just need to call or write in the chat which gives you a bit more direct action”

It seems that digital tools have simplified the process of organizing a meeting, but this in and of itself does not explain why there are more meetings now for many people. Another team manager offered the following explanation:

“I had fewer meetings before. In order to move forwards now, the need for more meetings is central. I am not in the heart of the action like I was before, without the same connection to others when I sit isolated in Outlook and Teams”

For this manager, there was a need to be constantly up to speed on what was happening in the team. If doing so requires verbally communicating with team members, the number of meetings will quickly increase in a digital context. Others agreed with this, which can be seen in the below highlights.

“You move around more at the [physical] office, and get a better connection than when you are just chatting. When we had to constantly check in with each other digitally, the schedule filled up with check in meetings”

“I spend more time planning now. You can’t take anything spontaneously, so you have to schedule everything”

When having to schedule time for even the smallest of questions, there seems to be a challenge with allocating an appropriate amount of time for the question at hand. As seen in section 4.5.1, time was often alloted through judgement calls, starting with a brief chat and then deciding if a meeting was necessary. The result of losing this ability can be problematic, as highlighted by this comment from a team manager:

“Every question gets the same amount of time now. It’s just meeting upon meeting upon meeting... The day gets chopped up and you can’t take any question over a cup of coffee. There is no dividing of the questions”

That “every question gets the same amount of time” implies that all questions are raised to the importance of demanding formal meetings. This speaks to an attitude where digital meetings are treated as formal, instead of treating them as brief conversations like those that might occur in the hallway on the way to the coffee machine.

While there seems to be challenges to scheduling meetings in the home office, some aspects of companies meeting cultures seem to have improved.

“Meetings are more efficient when no one needs to go fetch a cup or coffee or things like that. Meetings can be made shorter”

To avoid having constant back-to-back meetings, one manager has made use of the fact that their meetings are more efficient.

“I always schedule meetings to be 50 minutes instead of an hour to make sure that people have the time to have breaks and reflect”

Why then are meetings more efficient? It seems to be driven by the medium of digital video call meetings.

“Meetings become a bit weird, the spontaneity disappears and it doesn’t necessarily become a flow of thoughts and opinions. It is disciplined and good, but the fun aspect disappears”

The lack of flow of thoughts and opinions mentioned implies that meetings are more formalized and structured. Several people raised this point, that digital meetings are good for dealing with single questions, but less so for open discussions.

“It is easier when there is a clear agenda. It is harder to brainstorm and include everyone in those discussions”

It seems then, that digital meetings are very good in certain cases. When specific issues need to be addressed, digital meetings can do so more efficiently. However, for meetings where creativity is of importance, the digital format becomes a hindrance.

“The lack of idea meetings feels challenging”

“It was fun to meet and have planning meetings in person. It is a lot faster to develop an idea when you meet the others”

Related to the problem of including others in the discussions, we also found that smaller digital meetings received more positive comments as compared to large group meetings, which easily become ‘unnatural’. This speaks to a reluctance to raising once voice, or taking the center stage, in digital meetings.

Speaking to others through a computer screen is maybe not the most natural thing, but there seems to be different approaches to these meetings that can make it more or less pleasant for those involved. Using the video camera is one such thing, and its use was brought up many times by respondents.

“Without the webcam, you lose so much! You’re not even sure if anyone is listening”

“We should be having a conversation about this, maybe we should all use microphones and cameras?”

“It’s fun to have your video turned on, It feels like you are more a part of [the meeting]”

Feeling less of a part of meetings is not likely to increase individuals willingness to contribute. It is also not very likely to be more fun or bolster creativity.

Most respondents were positive about using a camera during meetings, mentioning its importance and value for communication through facial expressions and body language. Some also point out that without others being able to see you, there is a larger risk of losing focus and picking up the cellphone, either for private use or to engage another work task.

Despite this positivity towards the video camera, many admitted that they often opted to not use it themselves. A member of one team said that they had stopped using the cameras as people did not want to use it. These are some of their stated reasons why:

“[When you have the camera on] you won’t raise your voice in the same way during a heated discussion. At the same time it is hard to turn the camera on when you feel that you look a bit tired”

“People get lazier, which makes them less prone to having the camera on, which makes them lazier, and it turns into a negative spiral”

The use of cameras also depended on the type of meeting. One respondent explained that larger meetings saw less use of the video camera, whereas in small meetings people were more likely to turn their camera on.

4.8 Motivation in the Workplace, what did I learn?

4.8.1 Second Wave of the Pandemic Leads Thoughts Into the Future One of the topics that recurred was the understanding that this might very well be the new normal. Several respondents said that the spring was marked by a hope that the pandemic would soon blow over. The autumn wave of the pandemic and the return to the new normal has led to many starting to imagine a teleworking future.

“I believe that I have been an optimist, thinking that it will all resolve itself, but after the summer it dawned that this is probably the future. The managers now see themselves in situations where they need to accept this as a modus operandi and we start to sort of “catastrophy insight” or maybe rather a fear of the unknowns of planning distance work".

“In the future we are going to have to work with a more agile mindset and higher self-leadership. How we drive and manage organizations is without a doubt going to change".

“If we think that this is soon going to blow over, we will not strive towards sustainability and longevity".

“My job is now to look into the future and challenge my team. Currently they are working a lot in the here and now. We are going to have to reach out to one another with different technological tools".

“Now that we are building something for the future, we need to ask ourselves ‘where are we in two years?’, ‘what is our direction?’. That is easier in a physical setting. You work with visions so seldomly, that you’re unused to doing it remotely".

4.8.2 The Difficulties of Remote Work Working remotely is perceived as difficult. The diffusion of knowledge and information was one of the topics that kept coming back, with employees missing the knowledge transfer they thought possible only when having access to a whiteboard or a notebook.

“We have a bigger task emphasis now, so I’m still learning things in the day-to-day. I do, however, miss a forum for learning from one another. The guy at the desk next to me usually draws and explains stuff that he has learned. We have chat groups, where there is a kind of Q and A, but there’s not much room for reflection or discussion".

“It is harder to connect with people in digital meetings that you have never met before. Communication remotely is an active choice, whereas at the office it can happen spontaneously".

“Working together on tasks is easy, but we refrain from workshops, brainstorming sessions, or larger meetings. They’re not super efficient. I miss having a room with a whiteboard and my colleagues to try and solve a problem. I’ve seen that there are digital tools, but I haven’t yet found one that looks simple".

“Knowledge transfer takes longer digitally, but it is important to look at it as well invested time. The thought was that we would sit next to one another at the office".

With knowledge transfer perceived as challenging, it was found that this has a big strain on new hires. Onboarding was repeatedly presented as difficult from both social and technical perspectives and it was seen that a big responsibility lies with the team to make the new feel included, as presented in

section 4.5.3. It is apparent that with layers of communication disappearing, it is difficult to get the whole picture of the new workplace as well as the team.

“When onboarding, we see that it is very important to have a structured approach to the knowledge and the practical aspects. On top of that, it demands a lot of goodwill from the team as it is hard to contact someone you have only met once".

“The onboarding process is of enormous importance, but also one of the hardest ones to make work. People with already established contacts have a much easier time getting in touch".

“In the future, I will want to work a lot more from the office. The social aspects of work are still a large part of what makes work fun".

“My onboarding was physical for the first two weeks. It felt good getting to see how everything worked. Not just the tasks themselves, but it felt central to see the other aspects of it too".

“It is hard getting to know the new people joining our team. I don’t really have the energy to do it without the physical interaction. You sit on your hands, waiting for them to come to you when they need questions answered. When you don’t know them, you might as well send them to someone else".

4.8.3 Learning for the Future The new workplace requires new skills. The respondents have largely taken on the task of acquiring them by incorporating new tools in their repertoire since the start of the pandemic. Organizing meetings, sharing information, and contacting one another are examples of how people settle in more for every passing day.

“In the beginning, I thought that this was so boring. It is fun to brainstorm, test, and reflect together. The creative aspects disappeared, but you get used to it. Calling one another and whatnot".

“Video meetings were more difficult before, but you get used to them. We tried different communication channels with varying success".

“It was difficult replacing the habit of just walking up to someone and asking a question. As a matter of fact, getting help is easier on Teams. In the beginning, we saw the downsides but once you get into the habit it’s better".

“I have stopped asking ‘can you see my screen?’ so often. There has been a fundamental shift in my self-confidence with regard to using digital tools".

As the digital competence increases, so does the quality of interaction. Learning how to communicate with one another and new norms crystallizing as a result, seems to have a positive impact. The understanding of the situation as a new normal has led to respondents reflecting around the stress associated with the digital ways of working.

“The stress factor of this will go down noticeably once this is the established new way of working".

“The stress levels have gone down as we learned how to get in touch with one another and ask questions. To begin with, we chatted. Now, we call and share the screen instead".

“In our team, we have a standing point at our weekly meetings where we share the IT tip of the week".

4.9 Discussion

In this section we present a discussion of the different themes that emerged from analysing the interviews. We draw conclusions from the statements of participants and connect them to results from previous studies and theories.

4.9.1 Work-Life Balance

The theoretical background of this study presented a series of challenges with teleworking that were alluded to in the results section. The increased flexibility proved to be much appreciated by many respondents of this study, where travel time to and from work was replaced by sleeping in, getting time to exercise or getting children to school, or otherwise filling the scheduling void left by the commute with other relaxing activities. Having a family proved to be easier as a result of the pandemic.

On the flip side, previous research has shown some implications of the blurring of work and private life, one being worker ability to continue work from home even when they are sick. (Bloom et al., 2015) This goes to show that work moves closer into the private sphere. Several respondents in this study reported answering email and other work-related communication after office hours, implying that the increased flexibility gave people a harder time shut out work. This difficulty leads to the mental shifts that are taxing on their energy levels. (American Psychology Association, 2020) With lower energy comes a lower likelihood of engaging in the job crafting and self-leadership that helps provide structure in the home-office, leading to increased stress levels and thwarted autonomy.

When teleworking works, it provides increased autonomy for the workers, but it is perilous for those that do not feel they have the means to carry out their work. Communication issues and isolation from colleagues can lead to friction when one perceives that he or she does not have the information necessary to complete its tasks. This lack of information richness, or availability of information, means that the flexibility and autonomy enjoyed by someone can become an autonomy as well as a competence thwarter for the other. Perhaps understanding of this tendency, the teleworker takes to working longer hours to allow colleagues faster access to information.

The demands of the teleworker are higher, as the manager is not as present to provide direction and feedback. The responsibility is therefore on the individual to prioritize and carry out work, compensating for a lack of communication. Simultaneously, the manager and co-workers need to accept a lower sense of control with regard to the output and make conscious efforts to reward effort put in and work that is getting done as the human growth tendency is supported by a secure relational base.

Under this topic, it is argued that the technical and mental competencies available for employees to shape their ways of working and interaction become key to create a sustainable work-life balance. Conscious decisions to allow flexibility within a robust values system, where employees know what to expect of themselves and others, appear to be important. With the pandemic-induced teleworking situation being novel for just about everyone, there is a need for new, outspoken, norms for the balance between work and private life. It is therefore recommended for teams to start having discussions about expectations and boundaries.

4.9.2 The Importance of Organizations facilitating Social Interactions There were a varying degree of challenges to the climate of social interactions at the organizations under study. If these challenges are not addressed, we propose they can have a large impact on employee motivation. We see that for some people, the loss of social interactions made them feel more isolated, which according to Self Determination theory twarths a sense of relatedness necessary for sustaining motivation. Being isolated and being alone is, however, not the same thing. As long as a person feels that they are valued and included into the organization (Rigby & Ryan, 2018), spending most of the time alone will not necessarily give the feeling of being isolated. In other words, relatedness is not per definition contingent on constant face to face interaction. This helps explain why some find themself feeling more related to colleagues now as the dramatic shift to teleworking created a shared experience, managing a crisis.

“My department has become more tight-knit during this. We are all in the same boat".

Of course, organizations can not depend on everlasting crises to sustain motivation, but we argue that it goes to show that feeling a sense of relatedness does not demand constant collocation. However, no participant claimed that the quality of social interactions were better digitally than face-to-face, but it does seem like some organizations have managed to use the digital medium to facilitate a larger sense of relatedness. While many managers bemoaned lackluster digital interactions, some expressed a conviction to “finding ways to make it work”, whereas others simply seemed to want to hold tight until they could return to the office. Gorlick (2020) stated that a prolonged lack of social interaction is likely precarious to the psyche and was pointed to as a key challenge to combat by Park & Cho (2020). For this reason we see that those managers who are actively trying to find a forum where social interactions work, are more likely to succeed in providing employees with a sense of relatedness. A willingness to experiment with virtual fika, quizzes, walk and talks, chat groups and other ways of interacting, allows managers to find ways of interacting that can safeguard the cohesion and relatedness of colleagues.

Private interactions between individuals were shown to demand more proactiveness and effort. This too becomes an argument for the importance of organizations providing ample opportunities for social interaction. While those with more experience of digital socializing shared some rather interesting solutions – for example having a passive video call in the background – they may not come natural to everyone. Viewed through the lens of the Job Demands-Resources model, social interactions are job resources that reduce the associated cost of job demands. The increased efforts of meaningful social interactions can exhaust the resource and result in increased strain and less motivation. For this reason we see that organizations must work to decrease the efforts of interactions between colleagues.

4.9.3 Whose Responsibility is “it”, anyway? One of the findings concerned the support given to employees. A majority of the participants highlighted the support they were given with regard to the physical aspects of setting up an office. Employees were often able to bring hardware home, such as chairs, desks, and screens. While this was perceived as helpful, some managers reported an understanding that this did not particularly help the employees that lived in smaller apartments as they would not be able to create healthy working environments without compromising with the quality of living due to space constraints. This brings up an interesting dilemma, where the individual becomes responsible for its precarious working environment while simultaneously being held hostage by one’s own living conditions. Teleworking

works best for the economically and real estate-ically endowed, that can set aside space to separate the workplace from the homeplace.

With regard to the psychosocial aspects of work, the findings suggested that employers place an increased responsibility on the individual to “self-lead” and assume responsibility for their own well-being. Here, too, employees were sometimes offered support through seminars and education to help them better cope with the struggles of the home office. However, employees reported that they did not necessarily attend the seminars. Opinions differed and it seemed as if the people that would have made the best use of this support were the ones most reluctant to take it.

What can be observed is that, while the employer can provide support it is up to the individual to make the actual changes. This poses a risk, as not everyone is equally equipped to deal with the changes. In this study, it was observed that junior employees had a harder time coping with the lack of clarity provided by their managers. These participants were also the most likely to have the living conditions suggesting a harder time to adjust their home environments to accommodate work.

In order to cope with the individual differences, teams would do well in talking about this responsibility shift and its personal implications. For the employees with complicated more living arrangements, a higher need for guidance, and work as a social platform; it could be good to have these catered to, while countering possible negative responses associated with personal workplace recommendations. A mutual understanding for the reasoning behind these decisions and employee trust directed at manager and organization would possibly facilitate this problem.

4.9.4 The Power of Transparency The spread of information within an organization has interesting consequences on individual employees relation to their employer. Our results implied that much information used to be spread through informal channels when collocated at an office. When working from home, many people felt that the connection between their work and the rest of their company’s work became less obvious. Isolation of this kind might not necessarily mean that a person has no social interactions with colleagues. Relatedness, from a Self-Determination Theory perspective does not only demand that people are respected and included socially in the organization. To feel a sense of belonging as a worker, it matters that the worker is properly included and respected in the processes of the organization (Rigby & Ryan, 2018). This necessitates knowing what others are doing, and if people can not see the connection between their tasks and the larger goals of the company, a feeling of belonging will be harder to achieve which can strike at a person's motivation.

In some cases, teams managed to keep or improve cohesion but lost touch with other parts of the organization, something which can have negative consequences. As shown by Golden et al. (2008), a lack of work-related information can lead to decision making suffering lower quality. If teams do not know what the company as a whole is doing, it becomes harder to align the work to harmonize with other functions running the risk of teams pulling in separate directions. If top level management intervenes in such a scenario it may become a matter of resentment for teams, which further highlights the importance of having good information streams throughout the organization.

Some of the organizations had leveraged the benefits of digital solutions to spread information to all parts of the organization equally. They did so with weekly briefings from top level managers, weekly

newsletters from groups, and on a smaller scale in group chats where employees could give news on developments from their work area.

We see that this use of digital tools can work to counteract the negative effects of individual or team-level isolation, and even work to reach greater levels of transparency than previously. Looking at some of the results from companies with satellite offices far away from main branches, they tell the story of digital offices having the potential to be more inclusive when it comes to transparency and information sharing. Turning again to Self-Determination Theory, the case can be made that more transparency of information can increase a sense of relatedness, serving as a foundation for motivation (Rigby & Ryan, 2018).

4.9.4 Reaching out to each other The results show that digitally connecting with colleagues to discuss work-related issues that appear in day to day work was not completely straight forward. Even though the means to connect digitally through chats and video calls were available, when denied the possibility to “tap someone on the shoulder”, people were stumped and struggling to reach out with ease.

A point of interest with the responses given to questions about reaching out to others, was that many described an improvement from the early phases of distance working. Written text was ascendant for some early on, but a process of gravitating towards more hybrid approaches.

“Stress levels have decreased as [the employees] have learnt how to reach out to each other with questions. Initially we chatted, but now we call each other and share our screens”

“First, you write them in the chat. If the person responds you can call them. You don’t just cold call people”

This speaks to the development of new norms for digitally “tapping people on the shoulder”. This may be a naturally occurring process that takes time, but we argue that proactively setting out rules for how to reach out for support is essential. From a Job Demands-Resources perspective, coworkers are a resource in providing support, feedback or tips to employees. When access to this resource is denied or challenged, job demands can not be met without strain (Bakker, 2007). This stifles motivational levels and eventually leads to worse outcomes.

We found that built in functionality, such as status icons in digital platforms, were not always respected. This lack of a shared understanding about what the norms of reaching out are can induce stress for employees. We suggest that team level conversations should be held to decide what rules to abide by, and in what special circumstances they might be circumvented.

4.9.5 Challenges of holding Digital Meetings Two key issues emerged in regards to holding digital meetings. Firstly, it was felt by some people that meetings had to be scheduled for every single question that needed to be attended to. Secondly, meetings were felt to be too straightforward and lacking in creativity, levels of engagement were lower, and a low use of webcams were pointed to as a contributing factor.

When more meetings are deemed necessary, employees' schedules risks getting filled to the brim with back-to-back meetings. We encountered this from the participants, and especially from managers that compensated for a lack of interaction with employees with frequent check-in meetings. With digital

tools, it is possible to start a new meeting immediately after finishing another. Without an appropriate amount of time in between meetings, the psychological cost of switching to a new task can become increasingly big and a source of stress. As mentioned multiple times by participants, digital meetings were more efficient. The advice of one manager to make use of that fact and schedule meetings to be shorter can be a sound measure to avoid the stressors of back-to-back meetings.

The second key issue raised was a sense that digital meetings were lacking in creativity. It seems that people felt less eager to chime in to discussions in larger groups, but also a general tendency to be more disconnected when meeting virtually. Some people answered emails during meetings, others were distracted by their mobile phones. Now, while many employees agreed that digital meetings were less engaging, many managers said that they felt they had improved their use of digital tools over the course of the pandemic. By making full use of the many tools that are available, from digital whiteboards to break-out rooms, the quality of meetings can be expected to improve. There is a lot to learn, however, which is why we suggest that companies take a greater role in developing the skills necessary to make full use of them. If people are not able to make use of digital tools, but still expected to hold successful meetings or workshops digitally, their sense of competence will be diminished (Deci, 1975). For this reason we suggest that skills development schemes for using digital tools should be available for employees.

The importance of using webcams was frequently mentioned as a way to make people more engaged. The speaker could be energized by seeing that others are listening, and those listening felt like more a part of the meeting. However, it was obvious that when left unchecked, people tended to turn off their cameras. Since it seems to be an effective way to raise the quality of meetings, we suggest that managers take the lead in starting a conversation about when and why the camera should be used. People might have different reasons for not using the camera, but if these are brought to light, new norms and agreements can emerge about the use of cameras.

4.9.7 What did I learn? Over the course of the pandemic, the respondents of this study reported an initial sense of urgency. From one day to the other, everyone learned how to meet digitally and carry out their tasks from the home office. As people struggled with the digital tools, there was a mutual understanding that one could not come to expect the same performance levels as pre-pandemic. It does indeed seem as if remote work is something perceived as difficult.

When asked about what the respondents had learned during the pandemic, it often took some pointers and clarification to come up with digital skills as something they had honed. While most did feel that they had accomplished a higher level of confidence when using digital tools, such as meeting software. With respondents saying that diffusion of knowledge and information was perceived as particularly difficult, an ambitious team should focus on bridging those gaps, increasing information richness as well as the psychological needs posed by Self-Determination Theory.

It became apparent that the respondents had not necessarily reflected about their development during the pandemic, leading us to believe that there is an untapped source of autonomy and competence in highlighting these gains; something that could help leverage relatedness and increase motivation in the long term.

5 Conclusion

In this final chapter we present our conclusions and the answer to our main research question. The answer is presented by division of the sub-questions and subsequently formulated as a set of recommendations for managers and employees.. These recommendations are based on our findings from our empirical research as well as our literature review. Finally, we conclude with some notes on suggested future research.

5.1 Connection to Research Questions

The purpose of this thesis was to provide an understanding of motivation during telework in the context of company wide teleworking schemes by discovering the challenges and opportunities that individual employees have encountered in their experience of teleworking. We approached this research by conducting interviews with 18 employees and 12 managers from 5 different companies in knowledge intensive sectors. In order to fulfill the purpose, we constructed a main research question:

“How does enforced teleworking affect employee motivation in highly skilled, knowledge intensive Swedish organizations?”

We also formulated three sub-questions to help us answer our main research question. Here follows our proposed answers to these sub-questions respectively.

Sub-question 1: “What are the main challenges and opportunities for sustaining motivation during enforced teleworking, as presented by employees and managers?” In terms of challenges, we find that moving the office into the home can work to dramatically change the relationship between work and private life. When it is harder to shut out work and replenish, people run the risk of slowly draining their energy. Having the workplace inside the home leads to more mental shifts that are taxing on their energy levels. Lower energy in turn decreases the likelihood of engaging in the job crafting and self-leadership needed to provide structure in the home-office.

Removed from the office, employees run the risk of losing access to the tools they need to properly perform their jobs. Reaching out for support is harder, communicating can be harder, and there is less insight into what others are doing. Even though there are ways to avoid these challenges, they demand technical and mental competencies that everyone does not have. This can force employees to overcompensate by working more.

We find that a very pressing challenge is a lack of social interaction. It seems that digital communication tools are fairly capable at providing employees with the means to communicate work-related messages, either verbally or in written language. However, social exchanges were felt to be lacking, and many expressed this as a problem that impacted them negatively.

Another challenge that presented itself was a lack of clarity in whose responsibility it was to ensure that employees were capable of dealing with teleworking. Some saw that the organization's responsibility was to provide employees with computers and chairs, but that the onus lay on them to deal with a more complex work environment. Others felt that the organizations had a responsibility to see to that employees had the mental tools to handle the new circumstances.

Further we see that lack of information spread can leave people isolated with their tasks, losing a sense of being part of a larger whole. Inside teams there was also more friction involved when reaching out to others for support, which can cause strain for individuals.

There were two major challenges with holding digital meetings. Firstly, it was felt by some people that meetings had to be scheduled for every single question that needed to be attended to. Secondly, meetings were felt to be too straightforward and lacking in creativity, levels of engagement were lower, and a low use of webcams were pointed to as a contributing factor.

Turning now to opportunities, this research found that digital meetings are more efficient and to the point when compared to similar meetings in a physical context, that teams get more tightly knit as one’s own work gets placed in the center of attention, and that interfunctional communication becomes better as a result.

This research found that previous experience of socializing online, using short message services, gifs, and memes as primary platforms of interaction with peers were examples of cultural memes from which inspiration can be sourced with regard to informal workplace communication. A case can therefore be made that different backgrounds bring different upsides to the table and that, in the intersection between these, exist ways of making digital meetings a sufficiently equipped platform for interactions in the workplace.

A frequently mentioned positive opportunity of teleworking was the flexibility it allowed employees. In particular people with certain life situations found working from home to make life significantly easier. These were most often people with children, who made use of the flexibility of teleworking to spend time with their children without having to sacrifice time spent on work.

Finally, and we argue most importantly, we see from this research evidence that most if not all of the threatening challenges could be circumvented. Some teams managed to retain or improve a sense of togetherness and team spirit, some leveraged digital tools to create meaningful and fun social interactions. Others saw their internal communications become more structured, and the flow of information became more democratic as everyone had equal access to it. We see this as a valuable takeaway for companies currently struggling to adapt to teleworking.

Sub-question 2: “What can managers do to help facilitate motivation during enforced teleworking?” In our interviews, we found many examples of manager initiatives that enabled increased motivation. When relating our results to motivational theories, we see that managers should work to decrease the efforts necessary to interact with colleagues. A key aspect of managers that did this well was not that they managed to initiate perfect solutions, but rather that they exhibited a difference in attitude as compared to others. Where some seemed to be biding their time, waiting for things to return to normal, others stressed the importance of trying their best to make things work. This gave them a willingness to experiment with different ways of providing social interaction to employees. It also made them persistent, allowing teams to get past initial disinterest and negative attitudes. This “make it work”-mindset, we argue, is a valuable feature for managers to adopt.

The importance of information spread was also salient in our results. We find that a lot of responsibility falls on top-level management to provide information about the company as a whole. However, we see that team managers can take a larger role in synchronizing their respective teams to

keep everyone up to speed and make sure that everyone is running in the same direction. We see that digital solutions can be leveraged to do so, for example by having digital weekly newsletters from the different teams.

When booking meetings or reaching out to coworkers we conclude that new norms for availability and how to hold meetings will be necessary. It is important that there are some proactive efforts to ensure that there is a mutually agreed upon set of norms. We see that managers have an opportunity to take the lead in these efforts. This involves starting conversations within teams about when and how communications are appropriate, what a sustainable meeting would be, and whether webcams should be used in all team meetings. It is reasonable that these things should be decided together with team members, to take into account different needs of employees, but if agreement is reached in these questions it is incumbent upon the manager to seek to uphold them.

In this thesis, we have come to many conclusions that require leveraging digital tools to avoid problems with teleworking. If this is to be possible, managers must take into account the fact that digital competence takes time and effort to build. Even if an employees job can be performed equally well by means of digital platforms, it takes effort to learn to use the tools at hand. To avoid scenarios where employees feel that they lack the competence to, for example, hold successful digital meetings, there needs to be active efforts taken to develop the skills necessary for using digital tools. We encountered multiple teams where such development schemes existed, but were not used by all. Managers should therefore put it to employees as an expectation that they make use of these schemes. This might mean reserving some amount of time every week for skills development.

We see that teleworking exacerbates the individual differences between people, as their life-situations become more entwined with working life. For managers this means that they must be more aware of the individuals in the teams and their specific needs. Some will need more guidance and support, and managers will have to see to this. At the same time, managers will necessarily have to accept a lower sense of control over employees. We find that teleworking does not lend itself to micromanaging, but rather to a focus on output. To deal with this responsibility shift, managers should take initiative to have honest conversations with employees about what they, given their life-situations, need to become more autonomous in their work. Employees need to be more self-leading, but managers must help employees by providing them the skills and tools they need to be self-leading.

Finally, with the pandemic-induced teleworking situation being novel for just about everyone, there is a need for new, outspoken, norms for the balance between work and private life. It is therefore recommended for teams to start having discussions about expectations and boundaries. This is also a conversation that managers should take the lead in having.

Sub-question 3: “What can individual employees do to help facilitate motivation during enforced teleworking?” In our interviews, we see a benefit to employees engaging in introspective activities, striving to understand their own needs in the pandemic context. When teleworking, individual differences are exacerbated due to differences in life situations. For employees to receive necessary support, employees must first be aware of what their own needs are. This can be made easier by allocating time slots for reflection and introspection. Being more aware of how they personally are affected by new ways of working can make it clearer what weaknesses they need to work on, and be supported

with. It is also important to reflect upon how they have developed during the pandemic and celebrate improvements that have been made.

Furthermore, we see that technical and mental competencies to shape employees' ways of working and interacting become key for achieving a sustainable work-life balance. Technical competencies include being able to utilize digital tools to their full capabilities, whereas mental competencies include the ability to shut out work when the workday is over, as well as prioritizing and planning out work tasks. Such competencies become even more important as the responsibility to prioritize and carry out their work falls more squarely on the individual employee. To meet this, employees should strive for clarity in their work-related tasks, as well as articulate their boundaries so as to create clear expectations towards themselves and the different stakeholders in their lives. This means taking more responsibility not just for work tasks, but also for their own well-being.

Employees should also work towards a smarter use of communication technologies. With a perceived lack of social interaction and information richness being drivers of unhappiness in the workplace, every individual can take upon them the task of getting better at using the tools available to them. This includes taking an active part in team discussions of what norms should govern the use of digital tools, as well as making use of any competence development schemes that are offered by the company. Concrete examples of this could be to engage with colleagues in group chats, share the latest development in their work area, make use of the webcam, and finally be open to novel ways of socially interacting through digital means.

5.2 Recommendations for Managers

● Experiment with different ways of providing social interaction to employees, and be persistent. It can take time to find a format that works, and for people to get used to it.

● Keep teams in sync with each other. Weekly updates can ensure that teams are not isolated from the rest of the company.

● Start the conversation:

○ When can we expect others to be available, and when are we intruding into their personal life? Teleworking gives flexibility, but does that simply mean that we are at work all the time?

○ What can we do to make our meetings more sustainable? Scheduling 10 minute breaks between meetings can give people time to reflect.

○ When do our webcams have to be turned on? People would not decide to hide their face at the office, but is it alright to turn your camera off at the home office?

● Build digital competence in teams. Even if employees know how to use Teams or Slack, are they leveraging the tools to their maximum potential?

● Make participation in digital development schemes an expectation. Encourage employees to dedicate a set amount of time each week to improve their digital skills.

● See to individual needs. Some people will demand more support from managers where others will do fine on their own. Managers need to be perceptive of how employees are doing.

● Accept less control! But remember that employees will not lead themselves if managers do not see to that they have what they need to be self-leaders.

● Focus on the output that people produce, instead of worrying whether or not they are slacking off.

● Help employees set boundaries. For some it is acceptable to answer emails late at night, others become stressed. Keep a continuous dialogue and share tips for how to treat the work-life balance.

5.3 Recommendations for Individual Employees ● Allocate time for reflection. Note the progress you have made, but also reflect on what support you feel is necessary for your specific context. People will have different reactions to teleworking, and for your manager to be able to support you, you must first be aware of what your needs are.

● Spend time improving your technical competencies. Make use of resources that are provided from the company, and put in the effort to improve your skills.

● Make sure to plan and prioritize your daily work. Try to create a system for this. If your company makes use of productivity tools, take the time to learn to use it.

● Articulate clear boundaries between work and private life. This does not have to be strictly nine-to-five, just make sure to carve out spaces in your life where your mind is not focused on work.

● Improve your digital communications skills. Even if your knowledge of a digital communications tool is perfect, you can spend time helping the team as a whole use the technology in more efficient ways.

● If your company provides tips or resources for how to use digital tools, be sure to engage with these.

● Be active in online social life. This can be done by:

○ Engage with colleagues in group chats. Even if you prefer sitting around a coffee table, chat rooms can be a valuable social interaction.

○ Share the latest development in their work area with the team.

○ Make use of the webcam. No matter what the official policy on webcams are, having yours on will make you feel more a part of the meeting, and the speaker will be energized and encouraged.

○ Be open to novel ways of socially interacting through digital means. Some might be stilted or boring, but through experimentation and high levels of participation teams can discover ways that work for them.

References

Alvesson, M. (2011). Management of knowledge-intensive companies (Vol. 61). Walter de Gruyter. Amabile, T. M., DeJong, W., & Lepper, M. (1976). Effects of externally imposed deadlines on subsequent intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 92–98. American Psychological Association (2020), Multitasking: Switching Costs https://www.apa.org/research/action/multitask Anderson, A. J., Kaplan, S. A., & Vega, R. P. (2015). The impact of telework on emotional experience: When, and for whom, does telework improve daily affective well-being?. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(6), 882-897. Anderson, R., Manoogian, S. T., & Reznick, J. S. (1976). The undermining and enhancing of intrinsic motivation in preschool children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 915-922. Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day's work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Academy of Management review, 25(3), 472-491. Bakker, Arnold B., Oerlemans, Wido G.M. Daily job crafting and momentary work engagement: A self-determination and self-regulation perspective, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 112, 2019, Pages 417-430, ISSN 0001-8791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.12.005. Berg, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2008). What is job crafting and why does it matter. Retrieved from the website of Positive Organizational Scholarship on January, 23, 2021. Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2015). Does working from home work? Evidence from a Chinese experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 165-218. Cambridge Dictionary (2020), Teleworking https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/teleworking (accessed on 8 October 2020) Carson, D., Gilmore, A., Perry, C., and Gronhaug, K. (2001). Qualitative Marketing Research. London: Sage. Chirkov V, Ryan RM, Kim Y, Kaplan U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism and independence: a self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84(1):97–110 Collis, Jill, and Hussey, Roger. Business Research : A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students, Macmillan Education UK, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kth/detail.action?docID=6234884. deCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation: The internal affective determinants of behavior. New York, NY: Academic Press. Deci, E. L, & Cascio, W. F. (1972, April). Changes in intrinsic motivation as a function of negative feedback and threats. Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston, MA. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Deci, E. Olafsen, A. Ryan. R. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 19-43, 4. Deci, E. Ryan, R. (2000). The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, Volume 11, 2000 - Issue 4

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. & Jackson, P. (2012) Management research, Sage Publications. Frodi, A., Bridges, L., & Grolnick, W. S. (1985). Correlates of mastery-related behavior: A short-term longitudinal study of infants in their second year. Child Development, 56, 1291-1298. Gangé, M. Deci, E. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 331-362, 26(4). Golden, T. D., & Fromen, A. (2011). Does it matter where your manager works? Comparing managerial work mode (traditional, telework, virtual) across subordinate work experiences and outcomes. Human Relations, 64(11), 1451-1475. Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (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), 1412. Gorlick, A. (2020), The productivity pitfalls of working from home in the age of COVID-19, Stanford News, https://news.stanford.edu/2020/03/30/productivity-pitfalls-working-home-age-covid-19/ (accessed on 7 October 2020) Greer, T. W., & Payne, S. C. (2014). Overcoming telework challenges: Outcomes of successful telework strategies. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 17(2), 87. Grossoehme, D.H., 2014. Overview of Qualitative Research. Journal of Health Care Chaplaincy 20, 109–122.. doi:10.1080/08854726.2014.925660 Harackiewicz, J. M., Manderlink, G., & Sansone, C. (1984). Rewarding pinball wizardry: The effects of evaluation on intrinsic interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 287–300. Hudson, L., and Ozanne, J. (1988). Alternative Ways of Seeking Knowledge in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 508–521. Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (1975). Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and extrinsic rewards on children’s intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 479–486. Leung L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of family medicine and primary care, 4(3), 324–327. https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.161306 Lincoln, Y., and Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. London: Sage. Lister, K., & Harnish, T. (2011). The State of Telework in the US. Telework Research Network. Lockwood, N. R. (2003). Work/life balance. Challenges and Solutions, SHRM Research, USA, 2-10. Markus HR, Kitayama S. (1991). Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev. 98(2):224–53 Moreau E, Mageau G. (2012). The importance of perceived autonomy support for the psychological health and work satisfaction of health professionals: Not only supervisors count, colleagues too! Motiv. Emotion. 36(3):268–86 Morikawa, M. (2020), COVID-19, teleworking, and productivity, VoxEU.org, https://voxeu.org/article/covid-19-teleworking-and-productivity (accessed on 7 October 2020). Nie Y, Chua BL, Yeung AS, Ryan RM, Chan WY. 2015. The importance of autonomy support and the mediating role of work motivation for well-being: testing self-determination theory in a Chinese work organisation. Int. J. Psychol. 50(4):245–55

Orsini C, Tricio J, Segura C, Tapia D. (2020). Exploring teachers’ motivation to teach: a multisite study on the associations with the work climate, students’ motivation, and teaching approaches. J Dent Educ. DOI:10.1002/jdd.12050 Otis N, Pelletier LG. (2005). A motivational model of daily hassles, physical symptoms, and future work intentions among police officers. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 35(10):2193–214 Park, S., & Cho, Y. J. (2020). Does telework status affect the behavior and perception of supervisors? Examining task behavior and perception in the telework context. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-26. Reeve, J. (1996). Motivating others. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Rigby, S. Ryan, R. (2018) Self-Determination Theory in Human Resource Development: New Directions and Practical Considerations. Advances in Developing Human Resources, (2018), 133-147, 20(2). Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 Ryan, R., & Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom: Self-report and projective assessments of individual differences in children's perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 550-558. Sostero M., Milasi S., Hurley J., Fernández-Macías E., Bisello M., Teleworkability and the COVID-19 crisis: a new digital divide?, Seville: European Commission, 2020, JRC121193. Van Den Broeck A, Ferris DL, Chang C-H, Rosen CC. 2016. A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. J. Manag. 42:1195–229 Vetenskapsrådet (2021). Etik i forskningen https://www.vr.se/uppdrag/etik.html (Accessed: 2021-01-21) Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of management review, 26(2), 179-201. Zuckerman, M., Porac, J., Lathin, D., Smith, R., & Deci, E. L. (1978). On the importance of self-determination for intrinsically motivated behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 443–446.

6 Appendices

6.1 Interview Questions

The prepared interview questions are presented below. Note that as we conducted semi-structured interviews this template does not exactly represent the questions asked.

In Swedish: Frågor Följdfrågor 1 Följdfrågor 2 Vad har du gjort idag? Är det här en dag som alla andra? Hur länge har du jobbat hemifrån? I vilken utsträckning? Vad skulle du säga är den största skillnaden med att jobba på distans? Skulle du vilja beskriva en dag på ditt hemmakontor? Beskriv en ny situation som uppstått under distansarbetet Hur har era arbetssätt förändrats? Vilket är det vanligaste störningsmomentet? Hur lägger du upp ditt arbete? Tid och schemaläggning Föredragen arbetstid Pauser Interaktioner Vila Dagsplanering "Ritualer" Lägger du mer eller mindre tid på planering? Vad tycker du om att arbeta hemifrån? Vilka verktyg är viktigast för att du ska kunna genomföra ditt jobb? Är det något som du upplever att du saknar? Vilket stöd har du fått av din arbetsgivare med att jobba på distans? Känner du att du har möjlighet att påverka?

Är du dig uppdaterad kring vad som händer på arbetsplatsen? Ekonomi, skvaller, etc. Kan du berätta om interaktionerna med dina kollegor? När kände du senast laganda? Vad var det som hänt då? Upplever du att förväntningarna på dig skiljer sig nu när du jobbar på distans? Prestation Kollegor Tydlighet Förväntningar på sig själv? Ansvarsfördelning Upplever du stress till följd av förändrade förväntningar? Får du bra feedback Hur ser du på din personliga utveckling under perioden med hemarbete? Har du lärt dig saker som känns vidkommande för dig? Har du blivit bättre på någonting? Har sammanhållningen i ditt team påverkats?

Skulle du säga att du har mer eller mindre motivation att jobba under hemarbetet? Vad beror det på tror du?

Avslutningsvis, skulle du vilja spendera mer eller mindre tid på hemarbetsplatsen när pandemin är över jämfört med hur det var innan?

Hur tror du att arbetsplatsen kommer se ut efter CoViD?

Har de här frågorna lett till några nya tankar eller känslor kring hemarbetet?

Finns det några interaktioner som du upplever att ditt team skulle må bra av? Finns det några digitalt/tekniskt hjälpmedel som skulle kunna skapa förutsättningar som kanske inte finns fysiskt?

Vad heter din chef?

57 TRITA TRITA-ITM-EX 2021:59