• No results found

How about arranging your own work life? : about the fear of missing out at work and the willingness to work flexible

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "How about arranging your own work life? : about the fear of missing out at work and the willingness to work flexible"

Copied!
38
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)
(2)

Abstract

Contemporary organizations are presented with new ways of arranging work. The

implementation of flexible work conditions allows employees to gain more control over their work life, contrary to how things used to be. Such conditions give employees more control over time and places wherefrom they can conduct their work. This study examined the effects of the fear of missing out (FoMO) at work in relation to the willingness of employees to work flexible. FoMO originates from social theories, and therefore this study tried to link it to the organizational context using FoMO as a moderator in the relationship between work

outcomes – i.e. job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification – and the

willingness to work flexible. However, paradoxical effects of flexible working conditions of both positive and negative natures are currently discussed in the literature. An interesting consequence of more flexibility is the loss of direct contact with coworkers. People will not be obligated to work at a specific time or place, which results in more diversion regarding work locations (from home or at the office) and work times (during the evenings or in the weekends). When employees are not present at particular times and spaces, it might enhance their experiences of FoMO at work. FoMO points to the feeling that individuals experience others – in this context their colleagues – to have more rewarding experiences than

themselves. An online survey was administered to test the hypotheses, but results showed no direct or moderated effects of the variables used in this study. The overall findings indicate the need for future research. When studying FoMO, it seems necessary to take more factors into account, such as a clear distinction between job types and the existing knowledge structures that individuals might hold towards flexible working conditions.

Keywords: fear of missing out, flexible working conditions, job satisfaction, job commitment, work intensification

(3)

How about arranging your own work life?

About the fear of missing out at work and the willingness to work flexible With the development of new communication technologies, organizations are nowadays provided with opportunities for people to communicate and connect with other people almost anywhere in the world (Mazmanian, 2013). Therefore, people can stay in contact with colleagues and conduct their work from places they desire. This leads to an increasing number of flexible working designs in organizations (Ter Hoeven et al., 2016). Flexible work designs represent the extent to which employees’ working conditions are flexible and thus conform the New Ways of Working (NWW) introduced by Baarne, Houtkamp and Knotter (2010). Demerouti et al. (2014) describe three important

characteristics of this NWW; employees have more flexibility in controlling their work time, they have more control about the places they work from, and the NWW is facilitated by new media technologies.

The implementation of NWW or flexible work designs has important consequences for both the organization and its employees. The increasing flexibility of organizations in providing their employees with new ways of working could have a positive or negative effect on employee well-being. When the effect is not in favor of the employees, as for example, when people are increasingly feeling they miss out at work, this can in turn influence the contribution to successful performance in a negative way (MacDonald & Leary, 2005). This particular feeling of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) is a concept that just recently gained importance in the literature. It encompasses the feeling that others around you have more rewarding and more satisfying experiences. The concept is mostly used in terms of social media use, which allow people to constantly be in contact and connected with others. The experience of FoMO for individuals raises questions regarding the dependency of FoMO on temporal and contextual cues. For example, how is FoMO experienced in organizations and

(4)

how does it affect employees’ readiness to work more flexible, when exposed to greater possibilities in doing so.

The relationship between FoMO and the willingness for employees to work flexible is interesting when related to individuals in organizational contexts. When organizations decide to swift towards more flexible working conditions, this change can be essential for short-term competitiveness and long-term survival (Lüscher & Lewis, 2008). Advanced communication technologies intensify pressures to cut costs while enhancing flexibility for employees

(Lüscher & Lewis, 2008). Huy (2002) mentions unsuccessful change projects to be the blame of managers’ inability to cope with shifting organizational expectations. Organizational change therefore poses a particularly difficult setting for sense making. As Weick (1995) explained, sense making is an effort to create orderly and coherent understandings that enable change. Complexity rises as work demands shift, multiply, and potentially conflict (Hatch, 1993). When not handled properly, employees might struggle with changing processes and relationships (Lüscher & Lewis, 2008). Since possible effects of NWW can indeed change work processes and relationships for employees, for example when people are not tied to a specific time and place, studying the willingness of employees to work more flexible can provide insights in these phenomena. In turn, this can help organizations and managers to deal with the growing connectivity opportunities provided by flexible work designs and

communication technology use.

Research on the implementation and the effects of flexible work designs often points to the influence of personal and psychological characteristics. Therefore, this study will focus on the role that FoMO plays in the relationship between the work related outcomes job satisfaction, job commitment, and work intensification, and the willingness of employees to work flexible (Mazmanian et al., 2013; Ter Hoeven et al., 2016; Leonardi et al., 2010). For example, when the work environment tends to predict positive outcomes, people tend be more

(5)

satisfied and willing than when the environment was predicted to yield negative outcomes (Baard & Deci, 2004). Thus, people hold certain expectations about changes in their work environment, as well as towards the (un)willingness to work flexible.

The concept of FoMO has turned out before to lend itself well for a moderating role in person by situation interactions (Przylbylski et al., 2013), and will therefore be used as an important variable throughout this paper. The experienced level of FoMO at work might play an important role in employees’ willingness to work more flexible. Since this study is among the first to study FoMO in an organizational setting, FoMO will be related to a more

organizational setting. More specifically, this study will investigate the relationship between several work related outcomes and the willingness for employees to work flexible. Job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification are therefore expected to affect the willingness to work flexible among individuals. These three factors of employee well-being are found to serve as important predictors affected by FoMO.

In addition, consequences of flexible work designs are mainly discussed in terms of paradoxes, which is the result of the pursuit of a specific goal that requires actions that (partly) negate this goal (Stohl & Cheney, 2001). In other words, a paradox of contradictory, but simultaneously interrelated elements that exist concurrently (Ter Hoeven et al., 2016). Important paradoxes that are used in this research are the autonomy-control paradox and the connectivity paradox, proposed by respectively Mazmanian et al. (2013) and Leonardi et al. (2010). Both paradoxes point to positive and negative outcomes, such as more freedom and control for employees regarding their work days, but also the constant expectation of being available 24/7. Based on previous research and early findings, hypotheses are formulated in the next section, answering the following research question: Does FoMO at work plays a role in the relationship between job outcomes – job satisfaction, job commitment, and work

(6)

Theory and expectations

As mentioned in the previous section, flexible work designs are increasingly being implemented in organizations. Where workplaces used to be designed in order for workers to be present, in a physical matter at a specific time and place, new communication technologies provide organizations and its employees with wider possibilities. Strict rules and boundaries regarding office hours and places have led to the creation of fixed and official boundaries. Often, this process resulted in a separation of jobs allocated to different groups of work types (e.g. receptionists, secretaries and customer service officers, and managers, directors and supervisors) (Brewer, 2000). The rationale of introducing telecommunications and

information technology enables people to ‘distribute’ themselves (McLuhan, 1964) results in them no longer being tied to places (Brewer, 2000). This is one of the alluring consequences that people might experience towards the desire to work in more flexible organizations. In the case of telecommuting, workers are able to distribute themselves by maintaining real-time contact with co-workers and business associates through an infrastructure of communication and information technologies, making connections immediate and no longer hindered by distance (Brewer, 2000). This is a consequence that might result in a less allocated structure of job types and thus a promising change for men and women in organizing their work and lives around it. Consequently, the allocation of jobs between employees is disappearing as a result of more flexibility in organizations.

Besides these practical matters regarding less allocated job structures, other factors might also play an important role in the perceived willingness of employees to work more flexible, according to the new ways of working (Ter Hoeven et al., 2016). Because this study is trying to find effects of the fear of missing out (FoMO) at work on the willingness to work flexible, organizational outcomes can be important predictors affected by FoMO. The

(7)

intensification. They are expected to affect the willingness to work flexible and to be affected by an individual’s level of FoMO at work. Because FoMO has not been related to an

organizational setting before, these outcomes are chosen based on their relation to employee well-being and the organizational sphere. The ability of employees to manage their work and private lives also depends on the nature and supportive culture of the organization (Thompson et al., 2006), which in turn affects employee well-being and organizational performance. The next sections will outline relationships from existing theories and research about these

organizational outcomes and the willingness to work flexible and the effect of FoMO on these relationships.

Job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification

According to the self-determination theory (SDT), effective self-regulation and psychological health are based on the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs:

competence, autonomy, and relatedness. The first being the capacity to effectively act on the world, the second having the ability for self-authorship or personal initiative, and the third being closeness or connectedness with others (Deci & Ryan, 1985). These needs can affect the way people are satisfied with their jobs. For centuries, work has been seen as such an important part of human lives, that it is felt that whatever psychological mechanisms operate to make people feel satisfied or dissatisfied, also affects their (dis)satisfaction at work

(Schaffer, 1953). In this way, the SDT theory can be applied at people’s job satisfaction. The three basic psychological needs, depicted by Deci and Ryan (1985), could affect someone’s job satisfaction in a way that people feel competent and experience autonomy and relatedness at work. At the same time, attitudes towards a shift to more flexible work designs, might be influenced by employees’ job satisfaction, since it calls upon the basic human needs again. The development of technological advances will continue to change various domains of life,

(8)

including our work life as we know it (Lim, 2002). In addition, task success has been earlier found to be an important determent for job satisfaction (Locke, 1969) and expectations of flexible working designs might be affected by an increased or decreased feeling of autonomy, competence and relatedness to work tasks or colleagues.

Baard and Deci (2004) note that one of the reasons the concept of needs is appealing, related to job satisfaction and motivation, is that it has proven its usefulness in predicting the environment, to result in positive versus negative work-related outcomes. In other words, the needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness – determining people’s job satisfaction – can predict people’s willingness to work flexible, since people weigh the positive versus negatives consequences of flexible work designs based on these needs. For example, when the work environment tends to predict positive outcomes, such as more autonomy and control over work time, people would be more satisfied and willing than when the environment is predicted to yield negative outcomes (Baard & Deci, 2004). Thus, people hold certain expectations about changes in their work environment, such as towards flexible working conditions which influences their willingness to work flexible. The emergence of flexible work scheduling, principally telecommuting, the compressed work week and flex time have implications for the way work is designed and the type of workers who benefit from it (Brewer, 2000). Based on these theoretical approaches, the following hypothesis derived:

H1. When people feel more satisfied about their job, they will be more willing to work flexible.

The next work related outcome that is expected to influence an individual’s

willingness to work flexible is job commitment. Job commitment refers to the likelihood that an individual will stick with a job, and feels psychologically attached to it, whether it is

(9)

satisfying or not (Rusbult & Farrell, 1983). Hereby, using the distinction of Mowday, Porter and Steers (1982) concerning attitudinal and behavioral commitment, the use of the term implies both behavioral elements, as well as attitudinal elements (e.g., desire to maintain a relationship, feelings of attachment). When people are highly committed to their jobs, the expectation of the blurring of people’s work-life boundaries caused by an increased use of new communication technologies, can have a positive effect on the willingness of employees to work more flexible.

In addition, an important paradox that exists around the adaption of flexible work designs in organizations, is the connectivity paradox from Leonardi et al. (2010). This paradox suggests that the use of communication technology diminishes the perception of distance to colleagues, but simultaneously enhances expectations of constant connectivity for employees (Leonardi et al., 2010). Therefore, the expectation that people are less often around each other, but still in contact from a distance, might affect the willingness of employees to work flexible. Namely, the investment of private time is also inferred to as an emotional investment in the enterprise and is linked to a worker’s commitment or loyalty to the organization (Brewer, 2000). Meaning that when people are highly committed to their job, they are willing to invest more private time, which will be a result of increased flexibility regarding time schedules and work places. From this perspective, the following hypothesis derived:

H2. When people feel more committed to their job, they will be more willing to work flexible.

The final work outcome related to employee well-being is the work intensification people experience at their jobs. Burchell, Ladipo, and Wilkinson (2005) suggest that the

(10)

intensification of work is an important problem in terms of stress, psychological health and family tension. There appears to be a large part of competitive demands imposed on firms by the development of technological innovations. Organizations are then trying to manage these demands, by offering more flexibility to their employees (Burchell, Ladipo & Wilkinson, 2005). With the new and wider possibilities of communication technologies, organizations are provided with opportunities to increase production. However, this increased production neglects the fact that it might simultaneously expands employees’ work intensification. A second important paradox, referring to these effects, is the autonomy-control paradox, introduced by Mazmanian et al. (2013) or the empowerment/enslavement paradox from Jarvenpaa and Lang (2005).

This particular paradox refers to the fact that new communication technologies can help employees gain more autonomy and control over their work life. This is due to the fact that the opportunities of these new technologies provide new possibilities to work anywhere at any time, which can increase organizational performance. However, this can

simultaneously lead to a loss of control and autonomy over one’s job because of increased expectations of continuous connectivity and responsiveness that is also associated with communication technology use (Mazmanian et al., 2013). Since flexible work conditions are facilitated by new mediated communication means, flexible work conditions allow such expectations to constant connectivity. When people expect the flexible working conditions to negatively affect and increase expectations of connectedness, they might not be willing to go along with them. In turn, this can increase the work intensification people experience at their jobs. They will not be able to disconnect, and therefore experience the workload to be too high. In line with these findings, the third hypothesis was formulated:

(11)

H3. There is a positive relationship between work intensification and the willingness to work flexible

The fear of missing out at work

Consequences of flexible work designs are heavily discussed in the current literature, and these consequences point at important paradoxes that illustrate the paradoxical effects of flexible work designs for employees. Including consequences that can result in increased feelings of fearing to miss out at work. This concept of Fear of Missing Out (FoMO), can be defined as “the pervasive apprehension that others might be having rewarding experiences from which one is absent [and] it is characterized by the desire to stay continually connected with what others are doing” (Przybylski et al., 2013, p. 1841). In other words, people are

constantly drawn to different kinds of media in order to stay connected with others and to see what others are doing and what one could be missing.

These paradoxes propose that an increased use of communication technology at work helps employees gain the autonomy and flexibility to work anywhere at any time. However, employees simultaneously lose this autonomy due to increased expectations of continuous connectivity and responsiveness that are also associated with more communication

technology use (Mazmanian et al., 2013; Michel, 2011; Putnam et al., 2014). Because being available at all times has now become possible in the always-connected age of modern technology (Mazmanian et al., 2013).

This lack of contact with others at work might result in the feeling that people are missing out on things at work. The founder of the concept, Dan Herman, describes the feeling of FoMO as drowning in an unlimited number of options and choices to choose from

(Herman, 1996). The term was used for the first time in the context of marketing, and pointed at consumers always being focused on the empty part of the glass being ‘half-full’. Meaning –

(12)

regarding consumer’s buying behaviour – that people are always looking at the next new gadget or next new pair of shoes to buy (Van der Leest, 2016). Social media and young adults are often used in the same sentence, when describing the concept of FoMO. Despite

Przybylski et al. (2013) pointing to social media as being the ideal manner for people to keep track of other’s behaviour, it appears not to be the cause of the problem. The feeling of being left out of something, is a feeling that always existed within humans. However, it was never so easy to be and to stay in contact with so many others from all over the world. Thanks to, for example social media, people can always figure out when they missed out on something fantastic (Ariely & Simonson, 2003), including in their work environment.

Przybylski et al. (2013) conclude that certain personal factors can predict an

individual’s level of FoMO. They note that people who score high on FoMO, tend to be less satisfied and happy about their lives. Furthermore, these individuals that score high are noted to be missing the connection with others and experience the feeling of lack of control

(Przybylski et al., 2013). While this phenomenon is known from the more social side of theories and research, and is now recently used to monitor people’s social media behaviour, it could also affect the organizational context in which employees practice their work. This is the case, especially when the work environment is also changing into an always-connected setting with the available modern technology. This is an important result of the adaptations of organizations towards flexible work designs (Mazmanian, 2013; Treem et al., 2015).

Przybylski et al. (2013) found that the level FoMO differs among males and females, as well as among age groups. In their study females and participants below the age of 43 reported a higher level of FoMO. In order to find out whether the previous findings of an individuals’ level of FoMO also hold up when FoMO is studied within an organizational setting, the following hypotheses were added to the research:

(13)

H4. Females will report higher levels of the fear of missing out at work. H5. People below the age of 43 will report higher levels of the fear of missing out at

work.

FoMO at work as a moderator

The authors discussing the paradoxes regarding effects of flexible work designs, suggest that the use of communication technology diminishes the perception of distance to colleagues. However, this diminishing of distance also enhances expectations of constant connectivity for employees. So, besides opportunities for organizations to create more flexibility for employees (needing less space, less rent and saving energy), literature also points to possible negative outcomes. These are mainly focused on the well-being of employees. An important drawback of these flexible work designs for instance, is that coworkers lose contact with each other, as pointed out by the connectivity paradox, because they are not always present at the same time in the same room anymore. Also because they use more mediated communication technologies, which often lack in providing important social cues (Van den Hooff & De Ridder, 2014).

Previous research on the concept of FoMO from Przybylski et al. (2013) found that individuals who are low in their basic psychological need satisfaction would be more likely to experience FoMO. As mentioned earlier, a person’s job satisfaction is expected to influence a person’s willingness to work flexible. The indicated level of FoMO will thus influence this relationship in a negative way. Moreover, the fact that the feeling of FoMO has already been linked to general unhappiness and general unhappiness is likely to flow over within people’s job satisfaction, it is expected to influence their willingness to work flexible as well (Morford, 2010).

(14)

Furthermore, because a consequence of flexible working designs can result in

disconnectedness with coworkers and the work environment, people who are less committed to the organization and experience a high level of FoMO, will tend to be less willing to work flexible. Crabbe (2016) points out that people appear to be always busy working and

permanently have the feeling that things need to be done. Especially when people tend to be highly committed to their jobs, they will be more willing to invest time. However, when they experience high levels of FoMO at work, this could negatively affect their willingness to work even more flexible.

Finally, FoMO is expected to influence the relationship between work intensification and the willingness to work flexible, because the connectivity paradox highlights the

expectations that arise among employees to continually stay in contact with each other at all times. This can be strengthened by the feeling of FoMO at work. Flexible work designs could be an answer to this extreme feeling of high work intensification. These insights led to the final three hypotheses:

H1b, H2b & H3b. The relationship between work outcomes – job satisfaction (H1b), job commitment (H2b), and work intensification (H3b) – and the willingness to work flexible

will be negatively moderated by the fear of missing out at work.

An overview of all hypotheses is displayed in Model 1.

(15)

Method

An online questionnaire was administered in order to test the hypotheses. The questionnaire consisted of items representing the dependent variable – willingness to work flexible – and independent variable(s) – job satisfaction, job commitment, work

intensification and the fear of missing out at work. These variables will now be outlined more precisely regarding the origin and creation of the index scales. An overview of all questions and factor loadings of the different items can be found in appendix B and C.

Measures

Willingness to work flexible. The dependent variable was measured by using an established, but reworded scale from Ten Brummelhuis et al. (2012). The initial scale measured the extent to which people experience flexible work conditions at their

organizations. These items were slightly reworded by the addition of words like ‘would’, which resulted in eight items, including statements like ‘I would like to determine when my workday starts’ and ‘I would like to work from locations that are convenient for me’.

Therefore, the variable now represents a person’s willingness to work flexible. One factor was extracted from the principal component analysis, and the Cronbach’s Alpha of the eight items was .88, representing a reliable scale. A new index variable for the willingness to work flexible was created by taking the mean of the sum of eight items (M = 4.01, SD = 0.81).

Job satisfaction. The items used to measure this concept originated from a study of De Witte et al. (2000). The variable was operationalized with six statements. These items included statements such as: ‘I’m satisfied with my current job’ and ‘I gain respect and status from my current job’. Each statement could be answered on a scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). The higher the score of the independent variable, the more satisfied people are with their jobs. A factor analysis showed that the six items formed a one dimensional scale, with this component explaining 69% of the variance. The scale was reliable, with a

(16)

Cronbach’s Alpha of .91. A new job satisfaction index was created by computing the items into one variable, by taking the average of the sum of the six items (M = 3.67, SD = 0.87).

Job commitment. The second organizational outcome used in the analysis, was operationalized with 8 items, using an established scale from Farrell and Rusbult (1981). Items used to measure this concept, included items such as ‘I think that I could easily become attached to another organization as I am to this one’ and ‘This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me’. Each statement could be answered on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). A higher score on each item, means a higher level of job commitment. A factor analysis showed that the items load on a one

dimensional scale, with a Cronbach’s Alpha of .80. A new job commitment scale was created by computing the eight items into one variable, taking the average of the sum of all items (M = 3.11, SD = 0.74).

Work intensification. The third and final work outcome used in this study was operationalized by 5 items, previously used in a study of Boxall and Mackey (2008). The items included statements like ‘I never seem to have enough time to finish my work’ and ‘I have too much work, which prevents me from carrying out my tasks in the right way’. Each statement could be answered on a Likert scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). A higher score on each item, means a higher work intensification perceived by the participant. The factor analysis revealed a one dimensional scale, explaining 50% of the variance in the variable. The scale was reliable, with a Cronbach’s Alpha of .75. A work intensification index was created by computing the five items into one variable, by taking the average of the sum of all items (M = 2.75, SD = 0.82).

Fear of missing out at work. The moderating variable was measured by rewording nine items from the ten-item FoMO scale from Przybylski et al. (2013). This scale was initially created as an individual differences measurement of the concept of the fear of

(17)

missing out. The authors created a brief, self-report assessment that minimized participant burden and provided maximal information about an individual’s level of FoMO (Przybylski et al., 2013). Since this study focuses on the individual’s level of FoMO at an organizational level, only nine items of this scale were reworded, since one items was noted to be irrelevant for the organizational context1. This resulted in nine items, including items such as ‘I fear my colleagues have more rewarding experiences than me’ and ‘I get anxious when I don’t know what my colleagues are up to’. Each statement could be answered on a Likert scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). Factor analyses showed two dimensional scales, while the value of Cronbach’s Alpha, taken the nine items all together, was .79. It was therefore decided to create one new index variable by taking the average of the sum of all nine items (M = 2.40, SD = 0.66).

Control variables. Gender was transformed into a dummy variable, in order to test the fourth hypothesis. The variables age, working hours a week, and years of job experience were already at interval/ratio level. Additionally, a question was asked based on the type of job participants executed. This question was afterwards recoded into a dummy variable, which distinguished knowledge workers vs. non-knowledge workers. Not one of the control variables significantly correlated with the moderating or dependent variable. However, since previous research presents a strong link between gender and age and an individual’s perceived level of FoMO (Przybylski et al., 2013), it was decided to take gender and age as covariates in further regression analyses. Moreover, gender and age were used to test H4 and H5.

Data collection and respondents

Data were collected between April 8th and the 2nd of May 2016 using the online survey tool Qualtrics. The questionnaire contained questions about demographic information, job experience and working hours a week, and questions about concepts related to organizational

(18)

outcomes, the fear of missing out and the willingness to work flexible. Also, questions about participants’ personality and their use of media of communication were asked, all on Likert scales ranging from 1 to 5.

The online survey was administered to a total of 218 participants. All participants had to satisfy the requirement of being part of the Dutch workforce and be at an age between 18 and 65 years old. Participants were personally contacted by the researcher via e-mail or social media platforms such as Facebook and LinkedIn. The questionnaire took about 10 minutes to complete. From the 218 participants, 61 did not complete the whole questionnaire and 39 were excluded from further analyses, since they did not meet the age requirements or reported not to have a job. In the final sample of 118 participants (59% female) the mean age was 31 (SD = 11.7). Most respondents studied at a university level (49.2%) or a school for applied sciences (31.4%). The average years of job experience was 5 and the average hours that participants worked during a week was 30.

Results

In order to test hypotheses 1a, 2a, and 3a – direct relationships between work outcomes and the willingness to work flexible – Hayes’ PROCESS macro analysis was conducted with job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification as independent variables and the willingness to work flexible as dependent variable. Furthermore, FoMO at work was entered as a moderator, in order to test hypothesis 1b, 2b, and 3b. The results of these analyses are displayed in Table 1.

(19)

Table 1.

Results of Hayes’ PROCESS analyses to predict the willingness to work flexible with job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification as independent variables, and FoMO at work as moderator.

Model 1 Job satisfaction Model 2 Job commitment Model 3 Work intensification

B (SE) B (SE) B (SE)

Constant 3.95 - - - Gender 0.07 0.17 0.10 0.17 0.11 0.16 Age 0.01 0.01 - - - - Job satisfaction -0.05 0.11 Job commitment -0.07 0.12 Work intensification 0.12 0.09 FoMO at work -0.15 0.13 -0.14 0.13 -0.15 0.12

Interaction with FoMO at work

0.18 0.15 0.03 0.17 -0.02 0.17

Note. N = 118.

First, Hayes´ PROCESS macro model with the willingness to work flexible as dependent variable, job satisfaction as independent variable, and FoMO at work added as moderator is significant, F (6,111) = 2.32, p < .05. The model thus can be used to predict the willingness to work flexible, but the strength of this prediction is low. Only 9% of the

variance in the willingness to work flexible can be explained by job satisfaction and FoMO at work (R2= .09). However, the rest of the results show no significant direct or moderated effect between the variables. There was no direct relationship between job satisfaction and the willingness to work flexible, b* = 0.11, t = -0.49, p = .623, 95% CI [-0.28, 0.17], neither was there a significant moderation effect of FoMO at work, b* = 0.15, t = 1.21, p = .230, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.49]. There appears to be no relationship, meaning that a person’s level of job satisfaction did not predict their willingness to work flexible. FoMO at work had no negative

(20)

effect on this relationship as well, meaning that no evidence has been found to support hypotheses 1a and 1b.

Secondly, to test whether there was a significant relationship between job commitment and the willingness to work flexible, and whether this was affected negatively by FoMO at work, Hayes’ PROCESS macro analysis was conducted with job commitment as independent variable and the willingness to work flexible as dependent variable. FoMO at work was entered as a moderator. The model turned out not to be significant, F (6,111) = 1.54, p = .170. Moreover, the rest of the results show no significant direct or moderated effect between the variables either. There was no direct relationship between job commitment and the

willingness to work flexible, b* = 0.11, t = -0.55, p = 0.581, 95% CI [-0.29, 0.16], nor was there a significant moderation effect of FoMO at work, b* = 0.17, t = 0.170, p = .863, 95% CI [-0.31, 0.38]. These results thus indicate no relationship between the concepts, meaning that a person’s job commitment did not predict their willingness to work flexible. FoMO at work had no negative moderated effect on this relationship either, meaning that hypotheses 2a and 2b cannot be supported based on the results.

Furthermore, in order to test whether FoMO at work affected the relationship between work intensification and the willingness to work flexible, a final Hayes’ PROCESS macro analysis was conducted with work intensification as independent variable and the willingness to work flexible as dependent variable. FoMO at work was again entered as a moderator.The model with the willingness to work flexible as dependent variable, work intensification as independent variable, and FoMO added as moderator was significant, F (6,111) = 2.20, p < .05. The model thus can be used to predict the willingness to work flexible, but the strength of this prediction is low. Only 8% of the variance in the willingness to work flexible can be explained by the level of work intensification (R2= .08). However, no significant direct or moderated effect between the variables was found. There was no direct relationship between

(21)

job satisfaction and the willingness to work flexible, b* = 0.09, t = 1.24, p = 0.221, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.30], neither was there a significant moderation effect of FoMO at work, b* = 0.16, t = -0.05, p = .964, 95% CI [-0.33, 0.31]. No evidence has been discovered to support hypotheses 3a and 3b, meaning that a person’s perceived work intensification cannot predict a person’s willingness to work flexible in the presented model.

Additional analysis

In addition, some independent t-tests were conducted to see whether findings from Przybylski et al. (2013) also hold up for the sample and created ‘FoMO at work scale’ that was used in this research. First, an independent t-test was conducted to test whether the level of FoMO at work – using a reworded version of the existing FoMO scale from Przybylski et al. (2013) – was different between males and females. A second independent t-test, tested a difference between two age groups. Results for Levene’s test were F(116) = 0.08, p = .774 for age, and F(116) = 1.80, p = .183 for gender, showing that equal variances between the

different groups may be assumed. Results of the analyses are displayed in Table 2. Table 2.

Mean scores on FoMO at work for different age groups and gender

An independent t-test was conducted to test whether the level of FoMO at work was different between males and females. However, results showed that females (N = 70, M = 2.41, SD = 0.71) did not significantly score higher on FoMO at work, t (116) = -0.34, p = .714, than males (N = 48, M = 2.37, SD = 0.60). Meaning that the level of FoMO at work, does not significantly differs between males and females, not supporting hypothesis 4.

N Mean SD Gender Males Females 48 70 2.37 2.41 0.60 0.71 Age Below 43 Above 43 97 21 2.43 2.24 0.67 0.61

(22)

Finally, although a difference seems to be noticeable, results showed that people under age 43 (N = 97, M = 2.43, SD = 0.67) did not significantly score higher on the fear of missing out at work, t (116) = 2.17, p = .242, than people above age 43 (N = 21, M = 2.24, SD = 0.61). Results did not correspond with results as Przybylski et al. (2013) found in their research, meaning no significant difference has been provided in order to support hypothesis 5.

Discussion

The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between work outcomes – job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work intensification – and the willingness to work flexible. More importantly, the way this relationship is affected by the perceived feeling of the fear of missing out at work was tested. The implementation of flexible work designs has important consequences for both organizations and employees. Therefore, this increased flexibility could have a positive or negative effect on employee well-being (Mazmanian, 2013). Since possible effects of NWW can indeed change work processes and relationships for employees, studying the willingness of employees to work more flexible can provide insights regarding the growing connectivity opportunities provided by flexible work designs and increased communication technology use. The results of the study, however, do not show any significant links between work outcomes – job satisfaction, job commitment and work intensification – and the willingness to work flexible. Nor does a negative moderating effect occurs when FoMO at work is entered in the models.

A possible explanation for this might be the lack of other important factors. In line with what Przybylski et al. (2013) note, findings that show FoMO to vary in terms of

individual demographics – like age and gender – indicate that future work should test whether it constellates with a wider range of factors. Although the work outcomes used in this study served as important theoretical predictors, other factors could explain more. One of those

(23)

factors connecting FoMO at work to organizational outcomes and the willingness to work flexible, is the existing knowledge about the effects of new ways of working and flexible work designs. A theory that might prove insightful on this topic is that of frames and framing. When organizations shift towards more flexibility, for example regarding the time and

location where employees can conduct their work from, such organizational changes pose a difficult setting for sense making. The process of sense making will namely try to create orderly and coherent understandings that enable these changes (Weick, 1995). Framing is such a theory, that can be described as the effect of (behavioral) responses based on the process of information in which a frame is a cognitive knowledge structure that people tend to hold (Cronelissen & Werner, 2014). In other words, employees might hold strong prior

knowledge towards a shift to more flexibility, because they are aware of the possible consequences. This prior knowledge can predict certain thoughts and feelings towards technology use which in turn can guide behavioral acts towards the willingness to work flexible. Future research should keep the process of sense making and its effects as possible predictor into account.

Additionally, in terms of discussing the perceived feeling of FoMO at work, it must be noted that in order to measure this concept the existing scale of Przybylski et al. (2013) was reworded and used in the data gathering. While this study was not able to provide evidence of differences between groups – age and gender – of a person’s level of FoMO at work, previous results of Przybylski et al. (2013) noted that differences between these groups do exist when measured on a social level. Future research should look for differences of individual levels of FoMO across different contexts, such as socially related FoMO and work related FoMO.

Redesigning the work environment towards more flexibility creates an opportunity for changing the existing structure of work, because it forces employees to critically interpret existing rules and resources and provide alternatives (Schneiberg & Clemens, 2006). When

(24)

employees are confronted with different manifestations, paradoxical effects can occur on a functional and emotional level (Jarvenpaa & Lang, 2005), such as the connectivity or autonomy/control paradox. In order to cope with these paradoxes, employees develop mechanisms of an avoiding or confronting nature. The first refers to strategies that try to minimize interaction with enabled communication technologies, while the latter points to strategies that aim at understanding and accommodating technology (Jarvenpaa & Lang, 2005). When investigating the role of FoMO at work in the relationship between work outcomes and the willingness of employees to work flexible, future research can take these coping mechanisms into account. Specially since these particular coping mechanisms are a personal matter (Jarvenpaa & Lang, 2005), and therefore can be affected by a person’s level of FoMO. As noted before by Przybylski et al. (2013), future work should focus on examining FoMO in relation to personal characteristics, such as personality constructs like the Big-5.

While the presented study here made use of only Dutch workers, a more cultural theory might prove itself to be a useful way of understanding barriers for employees regarding their willingness to work flexible (Brewer, 2000). Place, distance and time are often seen as practical choices, and are perceived by different workers to be barriers or opportunities for flexible work designs. Brewer (1994) points to job type being a dominant feature allowing to make use of flexible work designs or not. For example, flexible work conditions have been proven to be more feasible to specific occupational groups of workers. Especially for some people already being provided with a shorter work week than others (Brewer, 2000). If job suitability is still one of the most likely perceived barriers to flexible work designs, future research should be more precise in the distinction of different types of workers.

Finally, the research method presented in this study features limitations that merit mention and create options for future research. The gathering of the data for this study was collected through on-time surveys, which reflect only snapshots of individuals in time.

(25)

Therefore, future work regarding FoMO in experimental settings will allow more causality to be evaluated (Przybylski et al., 2013). Also, because the sampling method consisted of contacts the researcher herself holds, a more random approach of finding participants is recommended. Most of the participants were relatives, friends or acquaintances of the researcher, making the sample convenient instead of random. Meaning that this sampling procedure has consequences for the external validity of the results of the study.

Overall, the study showed theoretical relationships to be at hand, but future research should provide more significant analytical results in order to substantiate them.

References

Ariely, D., & Simonson, I. (2003). Buying, bidding, playing, or competing? Value assessment and decision dynamics in online auctions.Journal of Consumer psychology,13(1), 113-123.

Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of performance and well‐being in two work settings. Journal of applied social psychology,34(10), 2045-2068.

Baarne, R., Houtkamp, P., & Knotter, M. (2010). Het nieuwe werken ontrafeld [Unraveling new ways or working]. Assen: Koninklijke Van

Gorcum/Stichting Management Studies.

Brewer, A. M. (2000). Work design for flexible work scheduling: Barriers and gender implications. Gender, Work & Organization, 7(1), 33-44.

Crabbé. T. (2016). Nooit meer te druk. Amsterdam:Luitingh-Sijthof.

Demerouti, E., Derks, D., Lieke, L., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). New ways of working: Impact on working conditions, work–family balance, and well-being. In: The impact of ICT on quality of working life, 123-141. Houten: Springer

(26)

De Witte, H. (2000). Arbeidsethos en jobonzekerheid: Meting en gevolgen voor welzijn, tevredenheid

en inzet op het werk. Leuven: Garant.

Hatch, M. J. (1993). The dynamics of organizational culture. Academy of management

review, 18(4), 657-693.

Herman, D. (2011). Fear of Missing Out. www.fomofearofmissingout.com/fomo.

Huy, Q. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers. Administrative science quarterly, 47(1), 31-69. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Lang, K. R. (2005). Managing the paradoxes of mobile

technology. Information systems management, 22(4), 7-23.

Leonardi, P. M., Treem, J. W., & Jackson, M. H. (2010). The connectivity paradox: Using technology to both decrease and increase perceptions of distance in distributed work arrangements. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38(1), 85-105.

Lim, V. K. (2002). The IT way of loafing on the job: Cyberloafing, neutralizing and organizational justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(5), 675-694.

Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational behavior and human

performance, 4(4), 309-336.

Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal,51(2), 221-240.

MacDonald, G., & Leary, M. R. (2005). Why does social exclusion hurt? The relationship between social and physical pain. Psychological bulletin, 131(2), 202-223.

Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2008). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being: A study of New Zealand worker experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of

Human Resources, 46(1), 38-55.

Mazmanian, M. (2013). Avoiding the trap of constant connectivity: When congruent allow for heterogeneous practices.Academy of Management Journal,56(5), 1225-

(27)

Michel, A. (2012). Transcending socialization: A nine-year ethnography of the body’s role in organizational control and knowledge workers’ transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(3), 325-268.

Morford M. (2010) Management Courage: Having the Heart of a Lion. Breinigsville, PA: Cold River Studio.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of vocational behavior, 14(2), 224-247.

Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., De Haan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human

Behavior, 29(4), 1841-1848.

Putnam, L. L., Myers, K. K., & Gailliard, B. M. (2014). Examining the tensions in workplace flexibility and exploring options for new directions. Human Relations, 67(4), 413-440. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of research in

Personality, 41(1), 203-212.

Rusbult, C. E., & Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Journal of applied psychology,68(3), 429 - 438.

Scandura, T. A., & Lankau, M. J. (1997). Relationships of gender, family responsibility and flexible work hours to organizational commitment and job satisfaction.Journal of organizational Behavior,18(4), 377-391.

Scarbrough, H. (1999). Knowledge as work: Conflicts in the management of knowledge workers. Technology analysis & strategic management, 11(1), 5-16.

Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication

Quarterly, 14(3), 349-407.

Ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Bakker, A. B., Hetland, J., & Keulemans, L. (2012). Do new ways of working foster work engagement? Psicothema, 24(1), 113-120.

(28)

Ter Hoeven, C. L., van Zoonen, W., & Fonner, K. L. (2016). The practical paradox of

technology: The influence of communication technology use on employee burnout and engagement. Communication Monographs, 83(2),1-25.

Treem, J. W., Dailey, S. L., Pierce, C. S., & Leonardi, P. M. (2015). Bringing technological trames to work: How previous experience with social media shapes the

technology's meaning in an organization. Journal of Communication, 65(2), 396-422.

Van den Hooff, J. & De Ridder, A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117 - 130

Van der Leest, C. (2016). Fear of missing out: Hoe kom je ervan af? Psychologie Magazine,

(29)

Appendix A. Online questionnaire

1. Bent u man of vrouw? O Man

O Vrouw ___

2. Wat is uw leeftijd (in jaren)? __

3. Wat is uw hoogst genoten opleiding? O Basisschool O Middelbare school O MBO opleiding O HBO opleiding O Universitaire opleiding O PhD

4. Hieronder worden twee scenario’s beschreven. Kies het scenario dat het dichtstbij de omschrijving van uw huidige baan past (indien u meerdere banen heeft, kies dan voor de baan waar u de meeste uren maakt):

0 Om mijn werk uit te voeren, maak ik voornamelijk gebruik van mijn kennis en geest. Het werk dat ik uitvoer heeft veelal te maken met het delen van informatie en kennis met collega´s, door veel samen te werken in teams. Het product of de service die mijn bedrijf levert, is abstract en vaak gebaseerd op het produceren van effectievere acties en het bedenken van oplossingen.

0 Om mijn werk uit te voeren, maak ik voornamelijk gebruik van mijn kennis en fysieke handelingen. Het werk dat ik uitvoer heeft veelal te maken met het uitvoeren van een opdracht of de vraag naar een bepaald product of het uitvoeren van een specifieke handeling. Het product of de service die ik verleen, is concreet en ontstaat voornamelijk vanuit individuele handelingen.

5. Hoeveel werknemers telt uw bedrijf (ongeveer)? __

6. Wat is de benaming van uw huidige positie? __

7. Big-five personality (Rammstedt & John, 2006) Hoe goed zijn onderstaande statements op u van toepassing?

Helemaal mee eens

Never Never Never Helemaal niet mee

(30)

Ik zie mij zelf als

1. … een gereserveerd persoon O O O O O

2. … iemand die anderen vertrouwt O O O O O

3. … iemand die lui dreigt te zijn O O O O O

4. … iemand die goed omgaat met stress

O O O O O

5. … iemand met weinig artistieke interesses

O O O O O

6. … een erop uitgaand en gezellig persoon

O O O O O

7. … iemand die fouten bij anderen ziet

O O O O O

8. … iemand die grondig werk verricht

O O O O O

9. … iemand die snel nerveus wordt

O O O O O

10. … iemand met een actieve fantasie

O O O O O

8. Job satisfaction (De Witte et al., 2000)

Helemaal mee eens

Never Never Never Helemaal mee

oneens

1. Ik voel mij betrokken bij mijn werk O O O O O

2. Ik ben tevreden met mijn huidige baan O O O O O

3. Mijn huidige werk geeft mij respect en status

O O O O O

4. Mijn werk geeft mij het gevoel dat ik nodig ben

O O O O O

5. Mijn werk geeft mij de mogelijkheid om te laten zien wat ik waard ben

O O O O O

6. Mijn werk geeft mij het gevoel dat ik iets van waarde bijdraag

O O O O O

9. Work Intensification (Boxall & Mackey, 2008)

(31)

mee eens mee oneens 1. Ik lijk nooit genoeg tijd te hebben om

mijn werk af te krijgen

O O O O O

2. Ik heb te veel werk, waardoor ik mijn taken niet goed uit kan voeren

O O O O O

3. De uitvoeringsstandaarden zijn erg hoog op mijn werk

O O O O O

4. Het wordt van werknemers verwacht om over te werken of te werken tijdens avonden en weekenden

O O O O O

5. Het wordt verwacht van werknemers dat zij hun werk boven hun privé leven zetten.

O O O O O

10. Job commitment (Rusbult & Farrell, 1983) Hoe goed zijn onderstaande statements op u van toepassing?

Helemaal mee eens

Never Never Never Helemaal

niet mee eens Ik zie mij zelf als

1. Ik zou erg gelukkig zijn, wanneer ik de rest van mijn carrière bij deze organisatie/dit bedrijf zou blijven werken

O O O O O

2. Ik vind het leuk om het over mijn werk te hebben, buiten mijn werk om

O O O O O

3. Ik zie de problemen van mijn

organisatie/bedrijf, als mijn eigen problemen

O O O O O

4. Ik denk dat ik net zo makkelijk aan een andere organisatie gehecht zou kunnen raken, zoals ik dat bij mijn huidige organisatie/bedrijf ben

O O O O O

5. Ik heb het gevoel dat ik deel uitmaak van ‘een familie’ op mijn werk

O O O O O

6. Ik voel mij emotioneel verbonden met mijn werk

(32)

7. Het bedrijf waar ik werk, betekent persoonlijk veel voor mij

O O O O O

8. Ik heb het gevoel dat ik bij mijn organisatie pas

O O O O O

11. Fear of missing out at work (Przybylski et al., 2013) Helemaal niet op

mij van toepassing

Never Never Never Helemaal op

mij van toepassing 1. Ik heb het gevoel dat mijn collega’s

meer lonende ervaringen hebben op het werk dan ik

O O O O O

2. Wanneer mijn collega’s lol hebben zonder mij, word ik ongerust

O O O O O

3. Ik word nerveus wanneer ik niet weet waar mijn collega’s mee bezig zijn

O O O O O

4. Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik de

‘inside jokes’ op het werk begrijp O O O O O

5. Ik vraag mij soms af, of ik niet te veel bezig ben met op de hoogte zijn van wat collega’s doen

O O O O O

6. Wanneer ik een mogelijkheid van samenkomst met collega’s (bijv. een bedrijfsborrel) mis, zit dat mij dwars

O O O O O

7. Wanneer ik met iets bezig ben, vind ik het belangrijk dit te delen met collega’s

O O O O O

8. Wanneer ik een geplande

bijeenkomst op het werk mis (bijv. een vergadering), zit dat mij dwars

O O O O O

9. Wanneer ik op vakantie ga, blijf ik op de hoogte van wat mijn collega’s op het werk doen

O O O O O

12. Willingness to work flexible (Ten Brummelhuis et al., 2012) Helemaal niet op

mij van toepassing

Never Never Never Helemaal op

mij van toepassing

(33)

1. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen wanneer mijn werkdag start

O O O O O

2. Ik zou graag mijn eigen schema voor het werk willen indelen

O O O O O

3. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen vanaf welke plek (thuis of op kantoor) ik mijn werk verricht

O O O O O

4. Ik zou graag zelf de time slots bepalen waarin ik werk

O O O O O

5. Ik zou graag willen werken op locaties die voor mij handig zijn

O O O O O

6. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen wanneer ik mijn e-mails beantwoord (op welke dag en op welk tijdstip)

O O O O O

7. Ik zou graag zelf invloed willen hebben op het tijdstip van telefoontjes plegen voor mijn werk

O O O O O

8. Ik zou graag de controle willen hebben over de communicatie die ik nodig heb voor mijn werk

O O O O O

13. Hoe lang werkt u al bij u huidige baan (in jaren)? ___

14. Hoeveel uur per week werkt u op kantoor? ___

(34)

B. Informed consent

Beste respondent,

Met deze brief wil ik u uitnodigen om mee te doen aan een onderzoek dat deel uitmaakt van mijn

masterscriptie van de Graduate School of Communication, wat deel uitmaakt van de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Het onderzoek waar ik uw deelname voor vraag gaat over de bereidheid van werknemers om gebruik te willen maken van meer flexibele werkplekken, werktijden en communicatiemiddelen om in contact te komen met uw collega’s. De vragen die gesteld zullen in de online vragenlijst, dienen om meer inzicht te krijgen in de factoren die een rol kunnen spelen in het wel of niet bereidheid zijn om flexibel(er) te willen werken.

De vragenlijst zal ongeveer 10 minuten van uw tijd in beslag nemen en aangezien het onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd onder de verantwoordelijkheid van ASCoR, Universiteit van Amsterdam, garandeer ik:

1. Dat uw anonimiteit gewaarborgd blijft en dat de informatie onder geen voorwaarde aan derden zullen worden verstreken.

2. Dat u ten alle tijd kunt weigeren te participeren in het onderzoek of kunt stoppen, zonder daar een reden voor op te hoeven geven. U kunt ook tot 24 uur na het invullen uw antwoorden terugtrekken uit de studie, waarna u antwoorden niet meer worden gebruikt in het onderzoek. 3. Dat deelname aan dit onderzoek u op geen enkele manier in aanraking komt met risico’s of

ongemak, er geen enkele vorm van misleiding zal plaatsvinden en u niet bloot zult worden gesteld aan offensief materiaal.

4. Dat niet later dan vijf maanden na de resultaten van het onderzoek, ik in staat zal zijn u te informeren over de conclusies en implicaties van het onderzoek.

Voor meer informatie over het onderzoek, vraag ik u contact met mij op te nemen door een email te sturen naar het volgende adres: tinkadros@hotmail.com.

Mocht u vragen of klachten hebben over het onderzoek of de procedures als consequentie van uw deelname, kunt u contact opnemen met de leden van ethische commissie van ASCoR, op het volgende adres: ASCoR Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-5253680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl. Alle klachten of opmerkingen zullen worden behandeld in vertrouwen en anonimiteit.

Ik hoop u hiermee van voldoende informatie te hebben voorzien. Graag wil van de mogelijkheid gebruik maken om u van tevoren te bedanken voor uw participatie.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Tinka Dros

(35)

Bij deze verklaar ik dat ik voldoende ben geïnformeerd over de gang van zaken van het onderzoek, zoals hiervoor is beschreven.

Ik geef toestemming, volledig en vrijwillig, om deel te nemen aan dit onderzoek. Hiermee verkrijg ik het recht om dit toestemming formulier, zonder een rede te hoeven geven, weer terugtrekken binnen 24 uur. Ik ben op de hoogte van het feit dat ik mij kan terugtrekken wanneer ik wil.

Indien de resultaten van dit onderzoek in wetenschappelijke publicaties of andere vormen van publicatie, dit op een manier gedaan wordt, waarbinnen mijn anonimiteit volledig gewaarborgd zal zijn. Persoonlijke informatie zal niet aan derden worden verstrekt.

Als ik meer informatie over het onderzoek wil ontvangen, nu of in de toekomst, kan ik contact opnemen met Tinka Dros (tinkadros@hotmail.com). Indien ik klachten of opmerkingen heb, kan ik contact opnemen met de Ethics Committee (ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl).

0 Ik begrijp de hierboven gepresenteerde tekst en geef toestemming voor mijn deelname aan het onderzoek

(36)

C. Rotated factor analyses

Varimax rotated factor solution for dependent and main independent variables

Variables and items Factor

loading

1 2

Job satisfaction

1. Ik voel mij betrokken bij mijn werk .59 -

2. Ik ben tevreden met mijn huidige baan .71 -

3. Mijn huidige werk geeft mij respect en status .62 -

4. Mijn werk geeft mij het gevoel dat ik nodig ben .65 -

5. Mijn werk geeft mij de mogelijkheid om te laten zien wat ik waard ben

.77 -

6. Mijn werk geeft mij het gevoel dat ik iets van waarde bijdraag .83 -

Job commitment

1. Ik zou erg gelukkig zijn, wanneer ik de rest van mijn carrière bij deze organisatie/dit bedrijf zou blijven werken

.58 -

2. Ik vind het leuk om het over mijn werk te hebben, buiten mijn werk om

- .91

3. Ik zie de problemen van mijn organisatie/bedrijf, als mijn eigen problemen

.72 -

4. Ik denk dat ik net zo makkelijk aan een andere organisatie gehecht zou kunnen raken, zoals ik dat bij mijn huidige organisatie/bedrijf ben

.86 -

5. Ik heb het gevoel dat ik deel uitmaak van ‘een familie’ op mijn werk organisatie/dit bedrijf zou blijven werken

.67 -

6. Ik voel mij emotioneel verbonden met mijn werk .77 -

7. Het bedrijf waar ik werk, betekent persoonlijk veel voor mij .79 -

(37)

Work intensification

1. Ik lijk nooit genoeg tijd te hebben om mijn werk af te krijgen .82 - 2. Ik heb te veel werk, waardoor ik mijn taken niet goed uit kan

voeren

.83 -

3. De uitvoeringsstandaarden zijn erg hoog op mijn werk .65 - 4. Het wordt van werknemers verwacht om over te werken of te

werken tijdens avonden en weekenden

.66 -

5. Het wordt verwacht van werknemers dat zij hun werk boven hun privéleven zetten

.57 -

Fear of missing out at work

1. Ik heb het gevoel dat mijn collega’s meer lonende ervaringen hebben op het werk dan ik

.69 -

2. Wanneer mijn collega’s lol hebben zonder mij, word ik ongerust

.79 -

3. Ik word nerveus wanneer ik niet weet waar mijn collega’s mee bezig zijn

.75 -

4. Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik de ‘inside jokes’ op het werk begrijp

.76 -

5. Ik vraag mij soms af, of ik niet te veel bezig ben met op de hoogte zijn van wat collega’s doen

.74 -

6. Wanneer ik een mogelijkheid van samenkomst met collega’s (bijv. een bedrijfsborrel) mis, zit dat mij dwars

- .59

7. Wanneer ik met iets bezig ben, vind ik het belangrijk dit te delen met collega’s

.54 -

8. Wanneer ik een geplande bijeenkomst op het werk mis (bijv. een vergadering), zit dat mij dwars

.43 -

9. Wanneer ik op vakantie ga, blijf ik op de hoogte van wat mijn collega’s doen

- -.56

Willingness to work flexible

1. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen wanneer mijn werkdag start .74 - 2. Ik zou graag mijn eigen schema voor het werk willen indelen .83 - 3. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen vanaf welke plek (thuis of op

kantoor) ik mijn werk verricht

(38)

4. Ik zou graag zelf de time slots bepalen waarin ik werk .80 - 5. Ik zou graag willen werken op locaties die voor mij handig

zijn

.75 -

6. Ik zou graag zelf willen bepalen wanneer ik mijn e-mails beantwoord (op welke dag en op welk tijdstip)

.76 -

7. Ik zou graag zelf invloed willen hebben op het tijdstip van telefoontjes plegen voor mijn werk

.79 -

8. Ik zou graag de controle willen hebben over de communicatie die ik nodig heb voor mijn werk

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

Er was geen verschil in pikgedrag tussen behandelde en onbehandelde kalkoenen, wel leidde bij onbehandelde kalkoenen de pikkerij tot meer beschadigingen en uitval door

2.8.1 Die vergestalting van die verhouding (status, sosiale afstand) tussen spreker en aangesprokene met middele wat nie aan die definisie van aanspreekvorme

De moderne natiestaat en het concept van nationale soevereiniteit ontwikkelde zich in Europa en spreidde zich vandaar naar andere delen van de wereld. Volgens Elie Kedourie is

Die &#34;weermag-eerste- jaars&#34; is egter baie bly om hul ontheffing omdat hulle voel dat hulle wel ' n voor- sprong het op die gewone eerstejaar en daarom moet hulle

Hence, in the current study, we aimed to assess the added value of HRQoL and severity of depression alongside other factors to predict the time to RTW for workers listed as sick

If the Access Committee is of the opinion that a closed criminal case requires further investigation regarding potential shortcomings in the investigation and prosecution of the

Yet, all chapters indicate that municipalities in North Lebanon have been differentially at risk to armed conflict (exposure); that the human and environmental

4.4 Kind fysiek Beoordelen groei, visuele en gehoorsbeperkingen, luchtwegklachten, voeding en overige fysieke gevolgen Kleine lichaamslengte, visuele stoornissen,