Social relations and employees' rejection of working from home: A social exchange perspective

• Published date: 01 November 2022
• Author: Alexandra Mergener,Miriam Trübner
• Date: 01 November 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12247

Received: 17 August 2021

|

Accepted: 4 May 2022

DOI: 10.1111/ntwe.12247

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Social relations and employees' rejection of

working from home: A social exchange

perspective

Alexandra Mergener

1

|Miriam Trübner

2

1

Department “Qualifications,

Occupational Integration and

Employment”, Federal Institute for

Vocational Education and Training

(BIBB), Bonn, Germany

2

Department “Sociology and Quantitative

Social Research Methods”, Johannes

Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz,

Germany

Correspondence

Alexandra Mergener, Department

“Qualifications, Occupational Integration

and Employment”, Federal Institute for

Vocational Education and Training

(BIBB), Robert‐Schuman‐Platz 3, 53175

Bonn, Germany.

Email: mergener@bibb.de

Abstract

Why do employees prefer working on‐site rather than

working from home (WfH)? This article examines how

personal concerns at the level of social relationships

affect rejection of WfH. Using a large‐scale representa-

tive survey of employees in Germany (N= 4448), we

apply logistic regression analyses to examine, first, the

association between employees' social relationships at

work and rejection of WfH and, second, the moderat-

ing effects of social relations in the private sphere.

Results indicate that the quality of the working

atmosphere with colleagues and the supervisor is a

motive for rejecting WfH, more so for people living

alone than for couples and families. Changes in

working culture due to widespread use of new

technology and digital mobile devices and, not least,

the extensive experiences with WfH during the Covid‐

19 pandemic, highlight the relevance of considering

employees' workplace preferences in future research.

KEYWORDS

living arrangements, logistic regression, remote work, SET, social

exchange theory, social integration, WfH, working from home

New Technol Work Employ. 2022;37:469–487. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ntwe

|

469

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and

reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2022 The Authors. New Technology, Work and Employment published by Brian Towers (BRITOW) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

The widespread job‐related use of digital information and communication technologies (ICT)

often allows access to work content and contact with colleagues from any location. Thus,

opportunities to work outside the employer's premises and instead from home are becoming

increasingly common —not least during the Covid‐19 pandemic. In public discussions on this

topic, it is often assumed that working from home (WfH) is an attractive job quality feature for

every employee and that previously untapped WfH potential should be exploited (e.g., Brenke,

2016). Despite alleged WfH advantages, for example, higher ability to concentrate (e.g., Biron &

van Veldhoven, 2016), job satisfaction (e.g., Wheatley, 2017), or better work–life balance (e.g.,

Felstead et al., 2002), pre‐Covid‐19 data for Germany has revealed that about one‐third of all

employees with untapped WfH potential do not want to work from home (Mergener, 2020a).

Hence, even if the occupational tasks, the technological equipment, and the employer would

allow it, there are reasons why employees reject this flexible work arrangement.

Already known motives for unused WfH include technical barriers (e.g., lack of technical

feasibility), cultural barriers (e.g., concerns about a negative signal effect) (Lott & Abendroth, 2020),

and professional isolation (e.g., worse career opportunities) (Cooper & Kurland, 2002;Goldenetal.,

2008). These motives focus on work‐and career‐related aspects, and personal concerns on a social

level have gone largely unaddressed in previous research. To fill this study gap, this paper focuses

on how social relationships are associated with employees' rejection of WfH.

Research on social aspects of on‐site working, such as the feeling of belonging to a group

(Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and the support and recognition of colleagues and supervisors

(Evans & Repper, 2000), has already shown that it cannot be fully experienced at physical

distance. In this context, it is argued that social isolation is a key challenge for employees who

WfH (e.g., Choi, 2018). WfH may increase the risk of becoming invisible in the workplace,

missing out on office gossip (Bailey & Kurland, 2002), losing social interactions and support

(Charalampous et al., 2019; Cooper & Kurland, 2002; Sardeshmukh et al., 2012) and, thus,

worsening the quality of relations with coworkers (Wöhrmann & Ebner, 2021). This is

supported by recent research during the Covid‐19 pandemic in 2020, when many employees

were WfH, but had already reported wanting to return to the on‐site workplace as soon as

possible, mainly for the above‐mentioned reasons (Kunze et al., 2020; Shockley et al., 2020).

However, it seems that the perceived quality of personal interactions is also decisive for

preferring on‐site work (Wright & Silard, 2021). Supportive colleagues can increase employees'

job satisfaction or organizational commitment (Chiaburu & Harrison, 2008), and negative

working atmosphere can lead to job dissatisfaction, higher stress level (Winnubst & Schabracq,

1996), or perceived loneliness at work (Wright & Silard, 2021). Accordingly, spatial distance

due to WfH can actually be beneficial for employees who experience negative atmosphere and

unsupportive relationships at work by buffering them from the downsides of their jobs (Collins

et al., 2016; Golden & Gajendran, 2019).

Moreover, the importance of social relationships at work differs by private social life of

remote workers, as people without strong social networks outside of work might value social

interactions at work more. Thus, teleworkers living together with their families are less likely to

feel socially isolated than those living alone, suggesting that they may compensate to a certain

degree for lack of social interactions with coworkers through interactions with spouses or

children (Feldman & Gainey, 1997; Recchi et al., 2020; Shockley et al., 2020).

According to social exchange theory (SET), individuals seek utility when interacting with

others. The type of exchange relationship differs depending on the role of the exchange partner

470

|