How to Increase Participation in Telework Programs in U.S. Federal Agencies: Examining the Effects of Being a Female Supervisor, Supportive Leadership, and Diversity Management

• Date: 01 December 2019
• Author: Hosung Sohn,Kwang Bin Bae,David Lee
• Published date: 01 December 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/0091026019832920
• Subject Matter: Articles

832920PPMXXX10.1177/0091026019832920Public Personnel ManagementBae et al.
research-article2019
Article
Public Personnel Management
2019, Vol. 48(4) 565 –583
How to Increase Participation
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
in Telework Programs in U.S.
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026019832920
DOI: 10.1177/0091026019832920
journals.sagepub.com/home/ppm
Federal Agencies: Examining
the Effects of Being a Female
Supervisor, Supportive
Leadership, and Diversity
Management
Kwang Bin Bae1 , David Lee2, and Hosung Sohn3
Abstract
Previous research has established the connection between teleworking and
organizational performance, but there remains a need to understand why employees
who are eligible for telework programs do not necessarily utilize the programs. This
study uses the 2013 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey to examine the effects of
being a female supervisor, supportive leadership, and diversity management, and the
moderating effects of contextual factors on employee eligibility and participation in
telework. We find that both supportive leadership and diversity management reduce
the nonparticipation in telework programs of employees who are eligible and willing
to telework. We also find that the interaction between being a female supervisor
and supportive leadership reduces the nonparticipation in telework programs when
employees are eligible for telework. These results imply that female supervisors who
use supportive leadership are more likely to contribute to increasing the number of
public employees who are able to participate in existing telework programs.
Keywords
telework, female supervisor, supportive leadership, diversity management
1Dongguk University-Seoul, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2University of Hawaii at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
3Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Corresponding Author:
Hosung Sohn, School of Public Service, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul
06794, Republic of Korea.
Email: hsohn@cau.ac.kr

---

566
Public Personnel Management 48(4)
Introduction
After Congress enacted the 2010 Telework Enhancement Act (TEA), institutional
environments and sociological shifts have led U.S. workplaces to increasingly adopt
telework programs (Cobert, 2016). In response to the TEA, the U.S. federal govern-
ment has begun promoting telework programs to help employees achieve a better
work–life balance (Facer & Wadsworth, 2008). For example, in 2014, President
Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum entitled “Enhancing Workplace Flexibilities
and Work-Life Programs.” This Memorandum gave federal employees more opportu-
nities to utilize work–life programs such as telework, dependent care programs, and
employee assistance programs. From 2013 to 2015, the number of federal employees
who utilized telework programs increased from 17% to 20%, and 44% were eligible to
telework in 2015 alone (Cobert, 2016).
Recent research shows that telework affects the work motivation and organiza-
tional performance of employees (Bae & Goodman, 2014; Bae & Yang, 2017; Caillier,
2012; S. Y. Lee & Hong, 2011; Saltzstein, Ting, & Saltzstein, 2001; Taskin & Edwards,
2007). Caillier (2012) finds that satisfaction is positively associated with telework and
organizational commitment. S. Y. Lee and Hong (2011) and Saltzstein et al. (2001), on
the contrary, find that telework is negatively associated with agency performance and
work–life balance. Recent studies have distinguished between eligibility and partici-
pation in telework (Bae & Kim, 2016; Caillier, 2013; D. Lee & Kim, 2018). A report
published by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in 2013 stated that, although
many federal agencies have officially adopted telework programs, some employees
may not participate in these programs because of fear of reprisal or discrimination.
Edelman (1992) states that, although an organization may adopt a certain program or
policy to meet the demands of the institutional environment, employees may not actu-
ally utilize the program because of insufficient resources or internal conflicts. Oliver
(1991) identified this phenomenon as a decoupling of the institutional environment
from internal circumstances.
Recent studies show that decoupling between eligibility and participation in tele-
work negatively affects organizational performance (Bae & Kim, 2016; Caillier, 2013;
D. Lee & Kim, 2018). Caillier (2013) and D. Lee and Kim (2018) find higher turnover
intentions and lower levels of perceived fairness and job satisfaction among employ-
ees who could not use eligible telework programs compared with employees who
could use them. Furthermore, Bae and Kim (2016) find that employees who are eligi-
ble but unable to utilize telework programs are likely to have lower levels of job satis-
faction than employees who are not eligible and unable to use telework programs.
They also find that eligible female employees who cannot utilize telework programs
show lower levels of job satisfaction than male employees who are not eligible and
unable to use telework programs.
Although previous studies explored the negative effect of decoupling between
eligibility and nonparticipation in telework on organizational performance, few
studies have investigated strategies to help increase eligible employee participation
in telework programs. Enhancing organizational performance and work motivation

---

Bae et al.
567
necessitates examination of the factors that help reduce the condition of decoupling
between eligibility and participation in telework. Therefore, we investigate the roles
played by female supervisors, supportive leadership, and diversity management in
reducing decoupling between organizational eligibility and participation in telework
programs.
In the following section, we discuss employee eligibility for and participation in
telework programs and a theoretical framework based on representative bureaucracy,
perceived organizational support for family-friendly policies, and diversity manage-
ment. We then describe the data and statistical methods used in this study before pre-
senting the results of our analyses. We conclude with a discussion of our findings and
a summary of their theoretical and practical implications.
Theoretical Background and Literature Review
Telework Programs: Eligibility and Implementation
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (2013) has defined telework as “a work
flexibility arrangement under which an employee performs the duties and responsibili-
ties of such employee’s position and other authorized activities from an approved work-
site other than the location from which the employee would otherwise work” (pp.
17-18). Under the TEA, all executive agencies have the discretion to establish policies
on telework eligibility and participation. Scrutiny has revealed, however, that a discrep-
ancy exists between eligibility and actual participation in telework programs. Although
employees in federal agencies may be eligible to utilize existing telework programs,
some are unable or unwilling to actually participate in the programs. Oliver (1991) and
Edelman (1992) define this phenomenon as decoupling between eligibility and partici-
pation in telework. In this study, we focus on this scenario because past research showed
that decoupling, or the discrepancy, between eligibility and participation in telework
negatively affects organizational performance (Bae & Kim, 2016; Caillier, 2013; D.
Lee & Kim, 2017). In fact, the 2013 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS)
reported that 199,423 (59.7%) were notified of their eligibility to telework. A total of
148,373 (52.1%) of the respondents participated in telework programs, and 58,274
(15.5%) of sampled employees were unable to utilize existing telework programs.
Representative Bureaucracy
The concept of representative bureaucracy suggests that governments become more
responsive to the public they serve when the demographic characteristics of bureau-
crats reflect those of the general public (Krislov, 1974). That is, when bureaucrats
make decisions, they represent, by virtue of the same or similar values and interests,
their demographically socialized group (Meier, Wrinkle, & Polinard, 1999).
Representative bureaucracy can be divided into two distinct forms: passive and active
(Meier & Bohte, 2001; Mosher, 1982). Passive representation refers to a bureaucracy
composed of “the same demographic origins (gender, race, income, class, religion,

---

568
Public Personnel Management 48(4)
etc.) as the population it serves,” to be more responsive to various social issues
(Wilkins & Keiser, 2006, p. 88).
Active representation, on the contrary, refers to bureaucrats using their discretion in
imparting benefits to the represented group (Meier, 1993; Meier & Funk, 2017; Meier
& Stewart, 1992; Pitkin, 1967; Sowa & Selden, 2003; Wilkins, 2007; Wilkins & Keiser,
2006). For example, Bradbury and Kellough (2011) argue that “active representation of
group interests occurs because individual bureaucrats reflect the views of those who
share their demographic backgrounds” (p. 157). Thus, responsiveness is due to bureau-
crat employees’ discretions to represent their groups. Sowa and Selden (2003) find that
minority supervisors with discretion tend to address minority interests. Regarding
active representation on gender issues, Riccucci and Meyers (2004) note that “the the-
ory of active representation holds, for example, that women as compared...