Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

Social presence and workplace ergonomics control predict perceived remote work performance

View more insights in Professional - Business - Organisational Behaviour

View more figures from Dalhousie University

View the page of Colin Conrad

Read the Study

Colin Conrad suggests social presence and workplace ergonomics control are important predictors of perceived performance

Image courtesy of interviewee. May 7, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the impact of remote and hybrid work, particularly post-pandemic, focusing on how individuals perceive their productivity in such environments. The author emphasizes the changes in workplace dynamics since 2022, driven by the forced adoption of remote work technologies during the pandemic.

The research aims to explore what factors contribute to perceived productivity, particularly examining two key factors: *social presence* and *control over workspaces*. Social presence refers to the feeling of connection with colleagues through digital mediums, while workspace control pertains to individuals' ability to customize their work environments at home, which could influence their productivity.

The study employs structural equation modeling to analyze survey data collected from a diverse group of individuals with remote work experience. Findings indicate that both social presence and workspace control are strong predictors of perceived performance. Interestingly, collaborative tool efficacy—how effectively individuals can use remote work technologies—emerged as a notable precursor to social presence.

The research also revealed that traditional management techniques, like frequent meetings, do not effectively enhance social presence, suggesting that managers should reconsider their approaches to employee engagement in virtual settings. The implications highlight the importance of developing skills to use digital collaboration tools effectively and fostering organic relationships among team members. Finally, the text suggests a growing need to address the challenges faced by junior employees in remote work settings, advocating for the cultivation of soft skills that facilitate better online interaction and engagement.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.000 --> 00:02.445
This is an interesting topic from my perspective

00:02.445 --> 00:03.565
because,

00:03.565 --> 00:06.445
the world was a very different place back in 2022, right?

00:06.905 --> 00:10.445
Uh, so today, you know, we live in a world where workplace,

00:10.825 --> 00:13.525
sort of remote work, hybrid work is kind of endemic.

00:13.525 --> 00:16.125
And a big part of that is, yeah, we had these technologies

00:16.185 --> 00:18.085
before the pandemic,

00:18.085 --> 00:21.005
but during the pandemic we had a phenomenon of sort

00:21.005 --> 00:22.685
of forced, adoption

00:22.825 --> 00:25.885
of these technologies in many aspects of society.

00:26.465 --> 00:30.205
Um, and so what I was very interested in knowing is,

00:30.225 --> 00:32.325
you know, for people who are just, you know,

00:32.675 --> 00:34.405
very common everyday folks,

00:35.715 --> 00:39.685
what is their experience like related to remote work?

00:39.945 --> 00:42.525
And specifically what I wanted to know were

00:42.525 --> 00:44.125
what are the factors that lead

00:44.145 --> 00:47.805
to their perceived productivity, in remote work?

00:48.225 --> 00:51.445
Um, and the approach that we took, to this paper was

00:51.445 --> 00:54.645
to take, you know, some of my previous work related

00:54.645 --> 00:58.325
to cognitive perspectives on information systems,

00:58.705 --> 01:01.125
and plug this in and try to merge this with,

01:01.325 --> 01:03.325
emerging literature in ergonomics.

01:03.825 --> 01:07.245
Um, so I was particularly interested in this phenomenon

01:07.245 --> 01:09.605
called social presence, which is the experience

01:09.705 --> 01:11.605
of fueling your colleagues

01:11.605 --> 01:13.685
through an information technology medium.

01:14.265 --> 01:15.325
Um, this is something

01:15.325 --> 01:17.125
that information systems scholars have

01:17.125 --> 01:18.525
studied for quite a while.

01:18.745 --> 01:21.565
It kind of draws heavily from the e-learning literature,

01:21.565 --> 01:23.525
but folks like David Geffen,

01:23.525 --> 01:24.805
started laying the foundations

01:24.805 --> 01:27.485
of expanded perspectives on social presence

01:27.715 --> 01:29.005
back in the early two thousands.

01:29.385 --> 01:31.965
Um, so I wanted to see if this was a predictor

01:31.965 --> 01:34.485
of perceived work performance for remote workers,

01:35.025 --> 01:36.445
and importantly,

01:36.555 --> 01:39.485
whether they had control over their workspaces,

01:39.545 --> 01:41.525
if this was an important aspect

01:41.525 --> 01:42.965
of their perceived productivity.

01:43.585 --> 01:47.925
Um, so in the case of, control over workspaces,

01:48.005 --> 01:51.285
I was particularly interested in knowing whether you're able

01:51.285 --> 01:53.405
to arrange your office, whether you're doing, able

01:53.405 --> 01:55.605
to do things like control your environment,

01:55.605 --> 01:57.925
potentially close your doors, these types of factors.

01:58.505 --> 01:59.885
Um, so being able

01:59.885 --> 02:02.645
to control your workspace in your homework environment, is

02:02.645 --> 02:04.885
that something that added to your productivity during

02:04.885 --> 02:05.885
that covid remote work?

02:06.405 --> 02:09.125
I actually will point readers always to the model

02:09.125 --> 02:10.525
because I'm from this discipline

02:10.525 --> 02:12.165
where we like boxes and arrows.

02:12.545 --> 02:14.685
Um, and I know we're gonna talk about the methods a little

02:14.685 --> 02:18.605
bit later, but for a paper that's based on a survey,

02:18.615 --> 02:19.925
using this type of approach,

02:20.025 --> 02:22.925
the structural equation modeling approach, we usually start

02:22.925 --> 02:25.325
with that model to then explain the concepts.

02:25.785 --> 02:30.405
Um, and so where I was coming from in this is I drew kind

02:30.405 --> 02:33.845
of heavily towards, from perspectives that were related

02:33.865 --> 02:35.885
to cognitive load, cognitive workload,

02:35.885 --> 02:37.885
and looking at some of the antecedents to that.

02:38.315 --> 02:41.005
It's not explicitly mentioned in this paper,

02:41.235 --> 02:42.565
that we were looking at things

02:42.565 --> 02:43.965
that were related to cognitive load.

02:44.345 --> 02:45.525
Uh, but, you know,

02:46.025 --> 02:50.605
you can see like the paper from Iris vei back in 1991 about

02:50.605 --> 02:53.325
cognitive fit, wa and friends a bit later.

02:53.665 --> 02:57.205
Um, besets, type of, stuff they all had to do

02:57.205 --> 02:59.165
with workplace collaboration technologies

02:59.705 --> 03:00.765
and sort of cognition.

03:01.225 --> 03:02.405
Um, and so what we wanted

03:02.405 --> 03:05.445
to do was look at the behavioral factors that were related

03:05.445 --> 03:07.685
to this in predicting social presence.

03:08.305 --> 03:11.525
Um, so the social presence literature, it is kind

03:11.525 --> 03:14.205
of interesting because though there are information systems

03:14.725 --> 03:17.845
researchers who come from, you know,

03:17.845 --> 03:20.285
the traditional sort of business school, type

03:20.285 --> 03:21.685
of mindset,

03:22.075 --> 03:24.365
it's also discussed pretty heavily in e-learning.

03:24.745 --> 03:29.205
Uh, so we tried pretty hard to, find, good examples

03:29.225 --> 03:31.285
of social presence, in the literature.

03:31.545 --> 03:33.565
Um, and we ended up drawing from Garrison

03:33.565 --> 03:37.285
and Friends 1999, which was later expanded by Richardson

03:37.345 --> 03:40.165
and Friends, in their social presence construct.

03:40.335 --> 03:42.365
There were a couple others that we threw in there,

03:42.385 --> 03:45.565
but basically we were trying to find the right sort of set

03:45.565 --> 03:48.565
of questions that were related to social presence,

03:48.625 --> 03:51.645
in the context of remote work, specifically drawing from

03:51.645 --> 03:53.925
that literature that mostly had to do with e-learning

03:54.145 --> 03:56.365
and also mostly had to do with collaboration.

03:57.345 --> 04:01.485
And then finally, we also had, this construct

04:01.625 --> 04:03.165
of, productivity.

04:03.565 --> 04:06.045
Productivity was actually a sort of missing piece

04:06.045 --> 04:07.685
of the puzzle because I'm not from an

04:07.685 --> 04:09.165
organizational behavior background.

04:09.625 --> 04:11.205
Uh, but that was from Williams

04:11.305 --> 04:14.405
and Anderson 1991, which I guess is actually one

04:14.405 --> 04:17.565
of the most commonly used productivity measures in

04:17.565 --> 04:18.645
organizational behavior.

04:18.675 --> 04:21.845
Like a lot of them use that type of approach,

04:22.385 --> 04:23.445
to measuring productivity.

04:23.465 --> 04:26.325
So sort of subjective self-report, very simple measure,

04:26.505 --> 04:28.205
but I guess it underpins a lot of their literature.

04:28.585 --> 04:31.965
Um, so we borrowed that for this, this study.

04:32.385 --> 04:34.605
Um, and then workplace economic

04:34.855 --> 04:36.445
sorry, ergonomics control.

04:37.265 --> 04:40.185
Um, this was actually kind of interesting

04:40.185 --> 04:43.345
because we drew a lot from the covid literature.

04:43.845 --> 04:46.055
Um, so a lot of this stuff,

04:46.055 --> 04:47.415
because, you know, when you write a paper

04:47.475 --> 04:50.895
and it's published in January 2nd, 2023, you know, most

04:50.895 --> 04:52.575
of the work happened in 2022, right?

04:53.035 --> 04:56.295
Um, so we were particularly interested in finding as much

04:56.295 --> 05:00.895
as we could about, sort of, different aspects

05:01.275 --> 05:04.495
of, workplace control over your home work environment

05:04.495 --> 05:07.135
that specifically had the tag around COVID-19.

05:07.675 --> 05:10.215
Uh, so the wreath and Haman and Berger Fort

05:10.215 --> 05:13.495
and Friends, both published in 2021,

05:13.915 --> 05:15.415
had parts of this.

05:15.595 --> 05:17.855
And they had different, identified different concrete

05:17.855 --> 05:21.215
factors around workplace control and home environments.

05:21.475 --> 05:23.055
So when we built our construct, we started

05:23.075 --> 05:26.255
by looking at those things, those factors that led,

05:26.255 --> 05:28.055
to productivity in their research

05:28.055 --> 05:31.175
that we assumed would probably work in this context as well.

05:31.715 --> 05:33.935
So this, it's important to qualify

05:34.085 --> 05:35.935
that this was done online.

05:35.995 --> 05:37.935
So this was done with an online panel.

05:38.435 --> 05:39.535
And the method

05:39.675 --> 05:42.015
and approach that we did was entirely questionnaire.

05:42.115 --> 05:44.575
So this is a per, sort of perception study.

05:44.595 --> 05:49.565
So we sent questionnaire messages

05:49.565 --> 05:51.805
to a group of people who we recruited

05:51.805 --> 05:53.325
through the prolific platform.

05:53.745 --> 05:56.485
And I think the condition that they had to follow

05:56.705 --> 05:57.805
Was that they had

05:57.805 --> 05:59.565
to have some experience with remote work.

06:00.065 --> 06:02.045
So they, that was sort of the exclusion criteria.

06:02.075 --> 06:03.325
They had to have had work,

06:03.325 --> 06:04.845
but they had to actually have had experience

06:04.845 --> 06:06.765
with remote work type of environment.

06:06.765 --> 06:08.565
So it was designed to be a very broad survey.

06:09.065 --> 06:11.605
Um, and the reason why we did it is

06:11.605 --> 06:13.245
because we wanted the larger sample size,

06:13.625 --> 06:15.685
not really the largest type of sample size,

06:15.705 --> 06:18.085
but more than big enough, to account for sort

06:18.085 --> 06:20.045
of subtleties in that sample population.

06:20.625 --> 06:23.085
Um, as well, the people had to be able,

06:23.155 --> 06:25.045
they were fluent in English,

06:25.585 --> 06:26.925
and they, you know,

06:27.195 --> 06:29.365
were across multiple countries in this case.

06:29.785 --> 06:32.685
Uh, so they were mostly countries in the developed world,

06:32.685 --> 06:34.645
though we did incorporate some voices in

06:34.645 --> 06:35.765
the developing world as well.

06:36.345 --> 06:39.965
Uh, so in this case, Portugal, Poland, Mexico, South Africa,

06:40.465 --> 06:43.045
as well as some other countries were included in this.

06:43.785 --> 06:47.325
Um, so we created these questionnaire measures based

06:47.345 --> 06:48.525
on the prior literature.

06:48.985 --> 06:52.725
And what we did is we asked the questions of the people on,

06:53.065 --> 06:55.445
Qualtrics, they responded to,

06:55.985 --> 06:57.285
the, the questionnaire.

06:57.345 --> 06:58.805
It was a pretty short questionnaire.

06:59.185 --> 07:01.285
Um, and then with all of that data,

07:01.515 --> 07:03.325
what we do is we use a technique called

07:03.645 --> 07:04.765
structural equation modeling.

07:04.985 --> 07:09.365
So, SEM, and just gonna flag this for a second

07:09.365 --> 07:11.325
because I'm an interdisciplinary researcher,

07:11.705 --> 07:14.045
but my primary audience is information systems.

07:14.715 --> 07:18.765
This technique is very common in information systems in some

07:18.765 --> 07:22.285
areas of psychology, and I think some areas of sociology,

07:22.705 --> 07:24.645
but a lot of other disciplines don't use this.

07:25.065 --> 07:27.565
Um, and I don't particularly know why.

07:28.125 --> 07:30.925
'cause from a methodological perspective for survey data,

07:31.315 --> 07:32.605
it's quite a bit more robust.

07:32.705 --> 07:36.165
It can help you understand causal relationships a lot better

07:36.165 --> 07:39.765
than say, multi multiple linear regression anyways.

07:40.265 --> 07:43.645
Um, so we use the structural equation modeling package in

07:43.645 --> 07:44.805
the, our programming language.

07:45.105 --> 07:47.845
You create the model and you specify the relationships,

07:48.625 --> 07:50.685
and then you're able to analyze, yeah,

07:50.715 --> 07:52.485
what is the robustness of that model,

07:52.585 --> 07:55.525
but more importantly, what are the relationships

07:55.525 --> 07:56.925
between the different variables?

07:57.385 --> 08:00.605
So if readers are able to take a look at the model, so

08:00.605 --> 08:01.885
that's the boxes and the arrows

08:01.885 --> 08:02.925
that's included on the paper.

08:03.425 --> 08:07.885
Uh, it will explain, sort of the significant,

08:08.145 --> 08:11.325
values as well as the, sort of predictors

08:11.325 --> 08:14.605
between the various aspects, that go into the model.

08:14.705 --> 08:18.845
So ultimately, for instance, workplace control being 34,

08:19.235 --> 08:21.445
percent, that's actually a kind

08:21.445 --> 08:23.485
of like a linear regression, but not quite the same.

08:23.825 --> 08:25.885
Uh, at any rate, it's a strong predictor

08:26.025 --> 08:27.365
of perceived performance.

08:27.365 --> 08:30.085
And likewise social presence, it's a pretty strong predictor

08:30.085 --> 08:31.405
of perceived performance as well.

08:31.745 --> 08:34.085
And the things that lead to social presence, the

08:34.645 --> 08:38.205
collaborative tool efficacy, was also quite significant.

08:38.475 --> 08:41.805
Yeah. So the findings of this work were kind of interesting

08:41.805 --> 08:45.645
because, what we've, we had some, some findings

08:45.645 --> 08:48.045
that we were quite confident were going to work out.

08:48.305 --> 08:50.325
And then we had a couple that were actually a little bit

08:50.325 --> 08:53.045
surprising and they actually were surprising.

08:53.065 --> 08:55.405
We, we were quite confident they were actually gonna

08:55.405 --> 08:56.525
have the opposite effect.

08:56.865 --> 08:58.565
Uh, and I have some explanations

08:58.565 --> 09:00.285
and some reasons as to why that might,

09:00.515 --> 09:01.525
that might have gone the way.

09:01.945 --> 09:04.325
Um, so into that model,

09:04.795 --> 09:08.605
basically when I explain the results, the R-M-S-C-A,

09:08.945 --> 09:11.725
the being 0.6 is basically means

09:11.725 --> 09:13.725
that this is a fairly robust model.

09:14.595 --> 09:17.925
It's not the most robust, but it is more than sufficient.

09:18.025 --> 09:20.965
So basically the statistics work out all the constructs they

09:20.965 --> 09:23.765
work together, to be able to explain the phenomenon, is

09:23.765 --> 09:24.885
what that statistic tells us.

09:25.505 --> 09:27.445
Um, but workplace control was a strong

09:27.445 --> 09:28.645
predictor of perceived performance.

09:29.185 --> 09:32.405
Uh, and social presence was of course a strong predictor

09:32.585 --> 09:33.605
of perceived performance.

09:34.145 --> 09:37.725
Um, but I think the more interesting part

09:37.905 --> 09:42.085
of the study was that we didn't just study the two things

09:42.085 --> 09:45.045
that predicted performance, but also the things that come

09:45.045 --> 09:48.005
before the sort of antecedents of social presence.

09:48.385 --> 09:51.365
And what we found was that collaborative tool efficacy,

09:51.385 --> 09:53.645
so people's ability, their perceived ability

09:53.665 --> 09:55.205
to actually work,

09:55.315 --> 09:57.765
with the technologies was a very strong predictor

09:57.765 --> 09:59.725
of whether they experienced social presence.

09:59.745 --> 10:02.245
So whether they experienced a meaningful relationship

10:02.245 --> 10:05.165
with their colleagues, during the COVID-19 sort

10:05.165 --> 10:08.285
of distancing, but, the mode of working.

10:08.545 --> 10:10.965
So whether this was synchronous or asynchronous,

10:11.305 --> 10:13.445
and importantly, the number of meetings that they had,

10:13.655 --> 10:16.565
those were not significant predictors of social presence.

10:17.105 --> 10:19.205
Uh, so why did we actually do this?

10:19.505 --> 10:22.685
Um, we asked, we wanted to study, whether

10:22.685 --> 10:23.885
or not some of the techniques

10:23.995 --> 10:27.125
that managers often used in these environments.

10:27.825 --> 10:31.045
Uh, so one example of such a technique was, okay,

10:31.225 --> 10:33.645
my employees are not around, so let's have a bunch

10:33.645 --> 10:34.645
of meetings,

10:34.645 --> 10:36.125
that will make them feel connected to the group.

10:36.735 --> 10:37.885
Turns out that doesn't.

10:38.705 --> 10:40.405
Uh, and that was really, I think,

10:40.405 --> 10:42.325
the more interesting finding of this paper.

10:42.545 --> 10:45.285
Uh, whether or not they're constantly being monitored

10:45.285 --> 10:48.805
or constantly being in sync with their workers as well was,

10:48.985 --> 10:50.885
or their, their colleagues was not a big

10:50.885 --> 10:52.085
predictor of social presence.

10:52.425 --> 10:53.645
Uh, so people's ability

10:53.665 --> 10:55.765
to use the technology was a great predictor,

10:55.945 --> 10:57.845
but those techniques that were very common

10:57.845 --> 11:00.205
during distancing were not great predictors.

11:00.745 --> 11:03.645
So the, the broader implications of this work is

11:03.645 --> 11:06.205
that I think organizations need

11:06.205 --> 11:08.845
to put a lot more thought into the actual techniques

11:08.845 --> 11:11.925
that they use to make remote work happen.

11:12.545 --> 11:13.885
Um, importantly

11:13.885 --> 11:16.245
because the collaboration tool efficacy impacts

11:16.245 --> 11:17.325
social presence as well.

11:17.665 --> 11:19.925
Uh, I think that's pretty strong evidence,

11:19.925 --> 11:21.965
from my perspective, that the ability

11:21.965 --> 11:24.885
to experience social presence online is actually a skill.

11:25.865 --> 11:29.125
Um, so a lot of my research right now is actually into

11:29.525 --> 11:31.485
learning sort of soft skills that allow people

11:31.505 --> 11:33.445
to use these types of technologies better.

11:33.945 --> 11:35.245
Uh, because, you know,

11:35.245 --> 11:37.325
if you can get good at learning online,

11:37.485 --> 11:39.085
'cause I'm more interested in learning personally,

11:39.085 --> 11:41.165
but also in collaboration,

11:41.585 --> 11:43.165
that's a skill that people can learn.

11:43.285 --> 11:45.445
I think people can become better at these things.

11:46.065 --> 11:48.765
Um, so we don't put a lot of thought into that,

11:48.765 --> 11:50.045
especially for young workers.

11:50.145 --> 11:52.885
And this is not directly in the paper, this is more,

11:53.005 --> 11:55.285
extrapolating in those key findings a bit more.

11:55.705 --> 12:00.205
Um, there's a lot of attention today in 2024 about how,

12:00.205 --> 12:02.765
remote work has kind of failed junior employees

12:02.765 --> 12:04.765
because they're not able to connect with their teams,

12:04.765 --> 12:07.285
they're not able to get too involved in the workplaces.

12:07.675 --> 12:10.165
Well, I would assert that that's actually a learned skill

12:10.395 --> 12:11.845
that you can do that.

12:12.145 --> 12:13.845
Uh, we just aren't very good at it.

12:14.465 --> 12:19.345
Um, so I think, as well with the number

12:19.345 --> 12:21.545
of meetings and the mode of meetings

12:21.565 --> 12:24.145
and their impacts on social presence,

12:24.375 --> 12:26.745
this basically tells me that,

12:27.485 --> 12:28.865
and a lot more attention needs

12:28.865 --> 12:33.025
to be focused on the concrete techniques that managers use

12:33.165 --> 12:36.425
to talk with their employees in online environments.

12:36.725 --> 12:37.945
And today, in 2024,

12:38.025 --> 12:39.665
I think there's a lot more knowledge about this.

12:39.815 --> 12:41.505
There's a lot more knowledge about how

12:41.505 --> 12:43.625
to effectively use well-designed tools.

12:44.125 --> 12:45.265
Uh, so what would be an example?

12:45.725 --> 12:47.945
Um, I think most of my students,

12:48.055 --> 12:51.185
because they did all the stuff during covid,

12:51.255 --> 12:52.905
they have some sort of understanding

12:53.125 --> 12:55.985
of a collaboration platform like Microsoft teams,

12:56.205 --> 12:57.745
or to a lesser extent, slack.

12:58.285 --> 13:01.025
Um, and that's good. They're able to communicate on mass,

13:01.025 --> 13:03.505
they're able to share, they're able to by default,

13:03.895 --> 13:06.905
give documents and stuff like this, create videos.

13:07.065 --> 13:08.545
They're very comfortable doing that.

13:09.085 --> 13:13.105
Um, but also to an extent they need to be able

13:13.125 --> 13:14.985
to do things that are almost fun.

13:15.685 --> 13:16.905
Um, so that's

13:16.905 --> 13:19.745
where our research on this topic has gone recently is

13:19.745 --> 13:21.905
to this, this last part, both the soft skills

13:21.905 --> 13:24.225
that I mentioned earlier about learning how

13:24.225 --> 13:26.065
to do the stuff online,

13:26.485 --> 13:29.105
but also, to what extent it's important

13:29.165 --> 13:32.105
to actually have fun, have organic relationships

13:32.135 --> 13:34.025
with your employees using these tools.

13:34.685 --> 13:36.945
Um, because the teams that do really well

13:37.495 --> 13:40.385
have great practices around remote work,

13:40.385 --> 13:41.665
from an employee's perspective.

00:00 - This is an interesting topic from my perspective because, the world was a very different place back in 2022, right? so today, you know, we live in a world where workplace, sort of remote work, hybrid work is kind of endemic. And a big part of that is, yeah, we had these technologies

00:16 - before the pandemic, but during the pandemic we had a phenomenon of sort of forced, adoption of these technologies in many aspects of society. and so what I was very interested in knowing is, you know, for people who are just, you know, very common everyday folks, what is their experience like related to remote work? And specifically what I wanted to know were what are the factors that lead

00:44 - to their perceived productivity, in remote work? and the approach that we took, to this paper was to take, you know, some of my previous work related to cognitive perspectives on information systems, and plug this in and try to merge this with, emerging literature in ergonomics. so I was particularly interested in this phenomenon called social presence, which is the experience of fueling your colleagues through an information technology medium.

01:14 - this is something that information systems scholars have studied for quite a while. It kind of draws heavily from the e-learning literature, but folks like David Geffen, started laying the foundations of expanded perspectives on social presence back in the early two thousands. so I wanted to see if this was a predictor of perceived work performance for remote workers,

01:35 - and importantly, whether they had control over their workspaces, if this was an important aspect of their perceived productivity. so in the case of, control over workspaces, I was particularly interested in knowing whether you're able to arrange your office, whether you're doing, able to do things like control your environment, potentially close your doors, these types of factors. so being able

01:59 - to control your workspace in your homework environment, is that something that added to your productivity during that covid remote work? I actually will point readers always to the model because I'm from this discipline where we like boxes and arrows. and I know we're gonna talk about the methods a little bit later, but for a paper that's based on a survey, using this type of approach, the structural equation modeling approach, we usually start

02:22 - with that model to then explain the concepts. and so where I was coming from in this is I drew kind of heavily towards, from perspectives that were related to cognitive load, cognitive workload, and looking at some of the antecedents to that. It's not explicitly mentioned in this paper, that we were looking at things that were related to cognitive load. but, you know, you can see like the paper from Iris vei back in 1991 about

02:50 - cognitive fit, wa and friends a bit later. besets, type of, stuff they all had to do with workplace collaboration technologies and sort of cognition. and so what we wanted to do was look at the behavioral factors that were related to this in predicting social presence. so the social presence literature, it is kind of interesting because though there are information systems researchers who come from, you know,

03:17 - the traditional sort of business school, type of mindset, it's also discussed pretty heavily in e-learning. so we tried pretty hard to, find, good examples of social presence, in the literature. and we ended up drawing from Garrison and Friends 1999, which was later expanded by Richardson and Friends, in their social presence construct. There were a couple others that we threw in there, but basically we were trying to find the right sort of set

03:45 - of questions that were related to social presence, in the context of remote work, specifically drawing from that literature that mostly had to do with e-learning and also mostly had to do with collaboration. And then finally, we also had, this construct of, productivity. Productivity was actually a sort of missing piece of the puzzle because I'm not from an organizational behavior background. but that was from Williams

04:11 - and Anderson 1991, which I guess is actually one of the most commonly used productivity measures in organizational behavior. Like a lot of them use that type of approach, to measuring productivity. So sort of subjective self-report, very simple measure, but I guess it underpins a lot of their literature. so we borrowed that for this, this study. and then workplace economic sorry, ergonomics control.

04:37 - this was actually kind of interesting because we drew a lot from the covid literature. so a lot of this stuff, because, you know, when you write a paper and it's published in January 2nd, 2023, you know, most of the work happened in 2022, right? so we were particularly interested in finding as much as we could about, sort of, different aspects of, workplace control over your home work environment that specifically had the tag around COVID-19.

05:07 - so the wreath and Haman and Berger Fort and Friends, both published in 2021, had parts of this. And they had different, identified different concrete factors around workplace control and home environments. So when we built our construct, we started by looking at those things, those factors that led, to productivity in their research that we assumed would probably work in this context as well. So this, it's important to qualify

05:34 - that this was done online. So this was done with an online panel. And the method and approach that we did was entirely questionnaire. So this is a per, sort of perception study. So we sent questionnaire messages to a group of people who we recruited through the prolific platform. And I think the condition that they had to follow Was that they had

05:57 - to have some experience with remote work. So they, that was sort of the exclusion criteria. They had to have had work, but they had to actually have had experience with remote work type of environment. So it was designed to be a very broad survey. and the reason why we did it is because we wanted the larger sample size, not really the largest type of sample size, but more than big enough, to account for sort

06:18 - of subtleties in that sample population. as well, the people had to be able, they were fluent in English, and they, you know, were across multiple countries in this case. so they were mostly countries in the developed world, though we did incorporate some voices in the developing world as well. so in this case, Portugal, Poland, Mexico, South Africa, as well as some other countries were included in this.

06:43 - so we created these questionnaire measures based on the prior literature. And what we did is we asked the questions of the people on, Qualtrics, they responded to, the, the questionnaire. It was a pretty short questionnaire. and then with all of that data, what we do is we use a technique called structural equation modeling. So, SEM, and just gonna flag this for a second

07:09 - because I'm an interdisciplinary researcher, but my primary audience is information systems. This technique is very common in information systems in some areas of psychology, and I think some areas of sociology, but a lot of other disciplines don't use this. and I don't particularly know why. 'cause from a methodological perspective for survey data, it's quite a bit more robust. It can help you understand causal relationships a lot better than say, multi multiple linear regression anyways.

07:40 - so we use the structural equation modeling package in the, our programming language. You create the model and you specify the relationships, and then you're able to analyze, yeah, what is the robustness of that model, but more importantly, what are the relationships between the different variables? So if readers are able to take a look at the model, so that's the boxes and the arrows that's included on the paper.

08:03 - it will explain, sort of the significant, values as well as the, sort of predictors between the various aspects, that go into the model. So ultimately, for instance, workplace control being 34, percent, that's actually a kind of like a linear regression, but not quite the same. at any rate, it's a strong predictor of perceived performance. And likewise social presence, it's a pretty strong predictor of perceived performance as well.

08:31 - And the things that lead to social presence, the collaborative tool efficacy, was also quite significant. Yeah. So the findings of this work were kind of interesting because, what we've, we had some, some findings that we were quite confident were going to work out. And then we had a couple that were actually a little bit surprising and they actually were surprising. We, we were quite confident they were actually gonna have the opposite effect. and I have some explanations

08:58 - and some reasons as to why that might, that might have gone the way. so into that model, basically when I explain the results, the R-M-S-C-A, the being 0.6 is basically means that this is a fairly robust model. It's not the most robust, but it is more than sufficient. So basically the statistics work out all the constructs they work together, to be able to explain the phenomenon, is what that statistic tells us.

09:25 - but workplace control was a strong predictor of perceived performance. and social presence was of course a strong predictor of perceived performance. but I think the more interesting part of the study was that we didn't just study the two things that predicted performance, but also the things that come before the sort of antecedents of social presence. And what we found was that collaborative tool efficacy, so people's ability, their perceived ability

09:53 - to actually work, with the technologies was a very strong predictor of whether they experienced social presence. So whether they experienced a meaningful relationship with their colleagues, during the COVID-19 sort of distancing, but, the mode of working. So whether this was synchronous or asynchronous, and importantly, the number of meetings that they had, those were not significant predictors of social presence. so why did we actually do this?

10:19 - we asked, we wanted to study, whether or not some of the techniques that managers often used in these environments. so one example of such a technique was, okay, my employees are not around, so let's have a bunch of meetings, that will make them feel connected to the group. Turns out that doesn't. and that was really, I think, the more interesting finding of this paper.

10:42 - whether or not they're constantly being monitored or constantly being in sync with their workers as well was, or their, their colleagues was not a big predictor of social presence. so people's ability to use the technology was a great predictor, but those techniques that were very common during distancing were not great predictors. So the, the broader implications of this work is that I think organizations need

11:06 - to put a lot more thought into the actual techniques that they use to make remote work happen. importantly because the collaboration tool efficacy impacts social presence as well. I think that's pretty strong evidence, from my perspective, that the ability to experience social presence online is actually a skill. so a lot of my research right now is actually into learning sort of soft skills that allow people

11:31 - to use these types of technologies better. because, you know, if you can get good at learning online, 'cause I'm more interested in learning personally, but also in collaboration, that's a skill that people can learn. I think people can become better at these things. so we don't put a lot of thought into that, especially for young workers. And this is not directly in the paper, this is more,

11:53 - extrapolating in those key findings a bit more. there's a lot of attention today in 2024 about how, remote work has kind of failed junior employees because they're not able to connect with their teams, they're not able to get too involved in the workplaces. Well, I would assert that that's actually a learned skill that you can do that. we just aren't very good at it. so I think, as well with the number of meetings and the mode of meetings

12:21 - and their impacts on social presence, this basically tells me that, and a lot more attention needs to be focused on the concrete techniques that managers use to talk with their employees in online environments. And today, in 2024, I think there's a lot more knowledge about this. There's a lot more knowledge about how to effectively use well-designed tools. so what would be an example?

12:45 - I think most of my students, because they did all the stuff during covid, they have some sort of understanding of a collaboration platform like Microsoft teams, or to a lesser extent, slack. and that's good. They're able to communicate on mass, they're able to share, they're able to by default, give documents and stuff like this, create videos. They're very comfortable doing that. but also to an extent they need to be able

13:13 - to do things that are almost fun. so that's where our research on this topic has gone recently is to this, this last part, both the soft skills that I mentioned earlier about learning how to do the stuff online, but also, to what extent it's important to actually have fun, have organic relationships with your employees using these tools. because the teams that do really well

13:37 - have great practices around remote work, from an employee's perspective.

Faculti AI can make mistakes