Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Duality of the Physical and Virtual Worlds of Work

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Topologies of Digital Work

Part of the book series: Dynamics of Virtual Work ((DVW))

Abstract

Telework or virtual office work is not new. However, in the past its adoption has been restricted to a minority of workers and companies. In 2017, only 3% of French workers regularly teleworked. This situation changed with the rapid spread of the Covid-19 virus forcing governments around the world to impose strict lockdowns to protect their populations. Many organisations massively adopted virtual office practices as a crisis management tool to protect their employees, to respect the government’s lockdown restrictions, and to save their business. This situation made many companies consider keeping part of their workers at home permanently to reduce their real estate costs, or even becoming a virtual company. However, this decision is not without consequences. In this article, we examine the duality of the employee interaction with the physical and virtual worlds of work through a literature analysis completed by means of two web-based surveys with white-collar employees disclosing their experiences with both worlds of work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akkirman, A. D., & Harris, D. L. (2004). Organizational communication satisfaction in the virtual workplace. Journal of Management Development, 24, 397–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albouy, V., & Legleye, S. (2020). Conditions de vie pendant le confinement: Des écarts selon le niveau de vie et la catégorie socioprofessionnelle (INSEE FOCUS No 197). Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/4513259. Accessed 16 February 2021.

  • Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 40–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y. (2000). Teleworking: Benefits and pitfalls as perceived by professionals and managers. New Technology, Work and Employment, 15, 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y., & Nicholson, N. (1997). Home, sweet work: Requirements for effective home-working. Journal of General Management, 23(2), 15–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunia, S., de Been, I., & van der Voordt, T. J. M. (2016). Accomodating new ways of working: Lessons from best practices and worst cases. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 18, 30–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cascio, W. F. (2000). Managing a virtual workplace. Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 81–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, C. B., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (2013). Swift trust in global virtual teams. Trusting beliefs and normative actions. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12, 45–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, C. (2020, July). Companies start to think remote work isn’t so great after all: Projects take longer. Collaboration is harder. And training new workers is a struggle. ‘This is going to be sustainable.’ The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-start-to-think-remote-work-isnt-so-great-after-all-11595603397. Accessed 16 February 2021.

  • De Guinea, A. O., Webster, J., & Staples, D. S. (2012). A meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning. Information & Management, 49, 301–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demerouti, E., Derks, D., ten Brummelhuis, L. L., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). New ways of working: Impact on working conditions, work–family balance, and well-being. In C. Korunka & P. Hoonakker (Eds.), The impact of ICT on quality of working life (pp. 123–141). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Depickere, A. (1999). Managing virtual working: Between commitment and control? In P. J. Jack (Ed.), Virtual working: Social and organisational dynamics (pp. 99–120). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinç, P. (2010). Spatial and behavioral variables that affect “emotional attachment” of users: A multidimensional approach for private offices. Gazi University Journal of Science, 20(2), 41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fried, M. (1963). Grieving for a lost home. In L. J. Duhl (Ed.), The urban condition—People and policy in the metropolis (pp. 151–171). Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golden, T. (2007). Co-workers who telework and the impact on those in the office: Understanding the implications of virtual work for co-worker satisfaction and turnover intentions. Human Relations, 60, 1641–1667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2002). A descriptive framework of workspace awareness for real-time groupware. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11, 411–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S., & Roseman, M. (1996). Workspace awareness in real-time distributed groupware: Framework, widgets, and evaluation. People and Computers XI, 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3588-3_18

  • Hallépée, S., & Mauroux, A. (2019). Quels sont les salariés concernés par le télétravail ? (DARES Analyses No 051). https://dares.travail-emploi.gouv.fr/dares-etudes-et-statistiques/etudes-et-syntheses/dares-analyses-dares-indicateurs-dares-resultats/article/quels-sont-les-salaries-concernes-par-le-teletravail. Accessed 23 February 2021.

  • Harris, R. (2015). The changing nature of the workplace and the future of the office space. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 33, 424–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helms, M. M., & Raiszadeh, F. M. E. (2002). Virtual offices: Understanding and managing what you cannot see. Work Study, 51, 240–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inalhan, G., & Finch, E. (2004). Place attachment and sense of belonging. Facilities, 22, 120–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inalhan, G., & Finch, E. (2012). Change and attachment to place. In E. Finch (Ed.), Facilities change management (pp. 155–174). Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Josef, B., & Back, A. (2018, April). Coworking as a new innovation scenario from the perspective of mature organizations. Paper presented at the Sixth International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship: New Business Models and Institutional Entrepreneurs: Leading Disruptive Change. Dubrovnik, HR. Abstract retrieved from https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/254939/1/Coworking%20Josef%20Back%20OFEL%202018.pdf. Accessed 16 February 2021.

  • Karia, N., & Asaari, M. H. A. H. (2016). Innovation capability: The impact of teleworking on sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 16, 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, E. L., & Kalev, A. (2006). Managing flexible work arrangements in US organizations: Formalized discretion or ‘a right to ask.’ Socio-Economic Review, 4, 379–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, S. (2017). IBM, remote-work pioneer, is calling thousands of employees back to the office. Quartz. https://qz.com/924167/ibm-remote-work-pioneer-is-calling-thousands-of-employees-back-to-the-office/. Accessed 23 February 2021.

  • Koroma, J., Hyrkkänen, U., & Vartiainen, M. (2014). Looking for people, places and connections: Hindrances when working in multiple locations: A review. New Technology, Work and Employment, 29, 139–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, K. R. T., & McInerney, C. R. (2002). Preparing to work in the virtual organization. Information & Management, 39, 445–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makarius, E. E., & Larson, B. (2017). Changing the perspective of virtual work: Building virtual intelligence at the individual level. Academy of Management Perspectives, 31, 159–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, J. M. (2002). Work environments. In R. B. Betchel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 443–460). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrabian, A. (1972). Nonverbal communication. Aldine-Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messenger, J. C., & Gschwind, L. (2016). Three generations of telework: New ICTs and the (r)evolution from home office to virtual office. New Technology, Work and Employment, 31, 195–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moser, G., & Uzzell, D. (2003). Environmental psychology. In T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology (Vol. 5, personality and social psychology, pp. 419–445). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nappi, I., & de Campos Ribeiro, G. (2020). Internet of Things technology applications in the workplace environment: A critical review. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 22, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-06-2019-0028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, D., Abell, J., & Sani, F. (2014). Social psychology (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L. D. (2016). From scientific to activity based office management: A mirage of change. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 12, 177–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. M., & Clair, J. A. (1998). Reframing crisis management. Academy of Management Review, 23, 59–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, A. S. (2012). The new science of building great teams. Harvard Business Review, 91(2), 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, M. P., Sanchez, A. M., de-Luis Carnicer, M., & Jiménez, M. J. V. (2004). The environmental impacts of teleworking: A model of urban analysis and a case study. Management of Environmental Quality, 15, 656–671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raghuram, S., Garud, R., Wiesenfeld, B., & Gupta, V. (2001). Factors contributing to virtual work adjustment. Journal of Management, 27, 383–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rioux, L. (2006). Construction d’une échelle d’attachement au lieu de travail: Une démarche exploratoire. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 38, 325–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roux-Dufort, C. (2007). Is crisis management (only) a management of exceptions? Journal of Contingences and Crisis Management, 15, 105–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweitzer, L., & Duxbury, L. (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring the virtuality of teams. Information Systems Journal, 20, 267–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secunda, P. M. (2019). The employee right to disconnect. Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, 9(1), article 3. https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjicl/vol9/iss1/3. Accessed 23 February 2021.

  • Simola, S. K. (2005). Organizational crisis management: Overview and opportunities. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57, 180–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, J. (2017, May 18). IBM, a pioneer of remote work, calls workers back to the office. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/ibm-a-pioneer-of-remote-work-calls-workers-back-to-the-office-1495108802. Accessed 16 February 2021.

  • Stokols, D., & Shumaker, S. A. (1981). People in places: A transactional view of settings. In J. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, social behavior and environment (pp. 441–488). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strengers, Y. (2015). Meeting in the global workplace: Air travel, telepresence and the body. Mobilities, 10, 592–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, A., & Shin, K. (2010). Exploring the effects of online social ties on knowledge sharing: A comparative analysis of collocated vs dispersed teams. Journal of Information Science, 36, 443–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Then, D. S. S. (2012). The business of space. In E. Finch (Ed.), Facilities change management (pp. 57–75). Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). National Compensation Survey (NCS). https://www.bls.gov/ncs/ncspubs.htm. Accessed 23 February 2021.

  • Van Meel, J. (2011). The origins of news ways of working: Office concepts in the 1970s. Facilities, 29, 357–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ESSEC Business School, Cergy, France

    Ingrid Nappi

  2. Paris School of Business, Paris, France

    Gisele de Campos Ribeiro

Authors
  1. Ingrid Nappi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gisele de Campos Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gisele de Campos Ribeiro .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany

    Mascha Will-Zocholl

  2. University of Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, Austria

    Caroline Roth-Ebner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Nappi, I., Ribeiro, G.d.C. (2021). The Duality of the Physical and Virtual Worlds of Work. In: Will-Zocholl, M., Roth-Ebner, C. (eds) Topologies of Digital Work. Dynamics of Virtual Work. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80327-8_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80327-8_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-80326-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-80327-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation