The COVID-19 pandemic piqued interest in remote work, but research yields mixed findings on the impact of working from home on workers’ well-being and job attitudes. The authors develop a conceptual distinction between working from home that occurs during regular work hours (replacement work-from-home) and working from home that occurs outside of those hours (extension work-from-home). Using linked establishment-employee survey data from Germany, the authors find that extension work-from-home is associated with lower psychological well-being, higher turnover intentions, and higher work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts. By contrast, replacement work-from-home is associated with better well-being and higher job satisfaction, but higher work-to-family conflict. Extension work-from-home has more negative effects for women’s well-being and work-to-family conflict. This distinction clarifies the conditions under which remote work can have positive consequences for workers and for organizations.
AksoyCevat GirayBarreroJose MariaBloomNicholasDavisSteven J.DollsMathiasZaratePablo. 2022. Working from home around the world. NBER Working Paper No. 30446. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
2.
AlipourJ. V.FalckOliverSchüllerSimone. 2020. Germany’s capacities to work from home. SSRN Scholarly Paper 3578262. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3578262
3.
AllenTammy D.GoldenTimothy D.ShockleyKristen M.2015. How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest16(2): 40–68.
4.
AllenTammy D.JohnsonRyan C.KiburzKaitlin M.ShockleyKristen M.2013. Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology66(2): 345–76.
5.
AltintasEvrimSullivanOriel. 2016. Fifty years of change updated: Cross-national gender convergence in housework. Demographic Research35(16): 455–70.
6.
ArntzMelanieSarraBen YahmedBerlingieriFrancesco. 2019. Working from home: Heterogeneous effects on hours worked and wages. SSRN Scholarly Paper 3383408. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.
7.
BakkerArnold B.DemeroutiEvangelia. 2007. The job demands–resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology22(3): 309–28.
8.
BakkerArnold B.GeurtsSabine A. E.2004. Toward a dual-process model of work-home interference. Work and Occupations31(3): 345–66.
9.
BarreroJose MariaBloomNicholasDavisSteven J.2021. Why working from home will stick. NBER Working Paper No. 28731. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
10.
BergPeterAppelbaumEileenBaileyTomKallebergArne L.2004. Contesting time: International comparisons of employee control of working time. Industrial and Labor Relations Review57(3): 331–49.
11.
Blair-LoyMary. 2009. Work without end? Scheduling flexibility and work-to-family conflict among stockbrokers. Work and Occupations36(4): 279–317.
12.
BloomNicholasLiangJamesRobertsJohnYingZhichun Jenny. 2015. Does working from home work? Evidence from a Chinese experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics130(1): 165–218.
BroszeitSandraGrunauPhilippWolterStefanie. 2016. LPP – Linked Personnel Panel 1415 – Quality of work and economic success: Longitudinal study in German establishments (Data documentation on the second wave). FDZ-Datenreport, 06/2016 (en). Nürnberg.
15.
BrucksMelanie S.LevavJonathan. 2022. Virtual communication curbs creative idea generation. Nature605(7908): 108–12.
16.
BrynjolfssonErikHortonJohn J.OzimekAdamRockDanielSharmaGarimaTuYeHong-Yi. 2020. COVID-19 and remote work: An early look at US data. NBER Working Paper No. 27344. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
17.
CameronA. ColinMillerDouglas L.2015. A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. Journal of Human Resources50(2): 317–72.
18.
ClarkSue Campbell. 2000. Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations53(6): 747–70.
19.
CollinsCaitlyn. 2019. Making Motherhood Work: How Women Manage Careers and Caregiving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
ChungHeejungvan der LippeTanja. 2020. Flexible working, work–life balance, and gender equality: Introduction. Social Indicators Research151(2): 365–81.
22.
DamingerAllison. 2019. The cognitive dimension of household labor. American Sociological Review84(4): 609–33.
23.
DeyMatthewFrazisHarleyLoewensteinMark A.SunHugette. 2020. Ability to work from home: Evidence from two surveys and implications for the labor market in the COVID-19 pandemic. Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, June. https://doi.org/10.21916/mlr.2020.14
24.
DingelJonathan I.NeimanBrent. 2020. How many jobs can be done at home?Journal of Public Economics189(September): Article 104235.
25.
DoellgastVirginiaBergPeter. 2018. Negotiating flexibility: External contracting and working time control in German and Danish telecommunications firms. ILR Review71(1): 117–42.
26.
DunatchikAllisonGersonKathleenGlassJenniferJacobsJerry A.StritzelHaley. 2021. Gender, parenting, and the rise of remote work during the pandemic: Implications for domestic inequality in the United States. Gender & Society35(2): 194–205.
27.
FullerSylviaQianYue. 2021. Covid-19 and the gender gap in employment among parents of young children in Canada. Gender & Society35(2): 206–17.
28.
GajendranRavi S.HarrisonDavid A.2007. The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology92(6): 1524–41.
29.
GerstelNaomiClawsonDan. 2018. Control over time: Employers, workers, and families shaping work schedules. Annual Review of Sociology44(1): 77–97.
30.
GlassJennifer L.NoonanMary C.2016. Telecommuting and earnings trajectories among American women and men, 1989–2008. Social Forces95(1): 217–50.
31.
GlavinPaulSchiemanScott. 2012. Work–family role blurring and work–family conflict: The moderating influence of job resources and job demands. Work and Occupations39(1): 71–98.
32.
GlavinPaulSchiemanScottReidSarah. 2011. Boundary-spanning work demands and their consequences for guilt and psychological distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior52(1): 43–57.
33.
GoldenLonnie. 2008. Limited access: Disparities in flexible work schedules and work-at-home. Journal of Family and Economic Issues29(1): 86–109.
34.
GoldinClaudia. 2014. A grand gender convergence: Its last chapter. American Economic Review104(4): 1091–119.
35.
Gonalons-PonsPilarGanglMarkus. 2021. Marriage and masculinity: Male-breadwinner culture, unemployment, and separation risk in 29 countries. American Sociological Review86(3): 465–502.
36.
HammerLeslie B.CullenJennifer C.NealMargaret B.SinclairRobert R.ShafiroMargarita V.2005. The longitudinal effects of work-family conflict and positive spillover on depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology10(2): 138–54.
KelliherClareAndersonDeirdre. 2010. Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of work. Human Relations63(1): 83–106.
39.
KellyErin L.KalevAlexandra. 2006. Managing flexible work arrangements in US organizations: Formalized discretion or “a right to ask.”Socio-Economic Review4(3): 379–416.
40.
KellyErin L.MoenPhyllis. 2020. Overload: How Good Jobs Went Bad and What We Can Do About It. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
KellyErin L.MoenPhyllisOakesJ. MichaelFanWenOkechukwuCassandraDavisKelly D.HammerLeslie B., et al. 2014. Changing work and work-family conflict: Evidence from the Work, Family, and Health Network. American Sociological Review79(3): 485–516.
42.
KellyErin L.MoenPhyllisTranbyEric. 2011. Changing workplaces to reduce work-family conflict: Schedule control in a white-collar organization. American Sociological Review76(2): 265–90.
43.
KimJaeseungHenlyJulia R.GoldenLonnie M.LambertSusan J.2020. Workplace flexibility and worker well-being by gender. Journal of Marriage and Family82(3): 892–910.
KrekelChristianWardGeorgeDe NeveJan-Emmanuel. 2019. What makes for a good job? Evidence using subjective wellbeing data. In RojasMariano (Ed.), The Economics of Happiness: How the Easterlin Paradox Transformed Our Understanding of Well-Being and Progress, pp. 241–68. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
47.
KühhirtMichael. 2012. Childbirth and the long-term division of labour within couples: How do substitution, bargaining power, and norms affect parents’ time allocation in West Germany?European Sociological Review28(5): 565–82.
48.
KurowskaAnna. 2020. Gendered effects of home-based work on parents’ capability to balance work with non-work: Two countries with different models of division of labour compared. Social Indicators Research151(2): 405–25.
49.
LeopoldThomasSkopekJanSchulzFlorian. 2018. Gender convergence in housework time: A life course and cohort perspective. Sociological Science5(May): 281–303.
50.
LottYvonneChungHeejung. 2016. Gender discrepancies in the outcomes of schedule control on overtime hours and income in Germany. European Sociological Review32(6): 752–65.
51.
LynessKaren S.GornickJanet C.StonePamelaGrottoAngela R.2012. It’s all about control: Worker control over schedule and hours in cross-national context. American Sociological Review77(6): 1023–49.
52.
MackebenJanRufKevinGrunauPhilippWolterStefanie. 2018. LPP – Linked Personnel Panel 1617 – Quality of work and economic success: Longitudinal study in German establishments (data documentation on the third wave), FDZ-Datenreport 04/2018 (en), Nürnberg. DOI: 10.5164/IAB.FDZD.1804.en.v1
53.
MackebenJanRufKevinWolterStefanieGrunauPhilipp. 2018. Linked Personnel Panel (LPP) – Version 1617 v1. Research Data Centre of the Federal Employment Agency (BA) at the Institute for Employment Research (IAB). DOI: 10.5164/IAB.LPP1617.de.en.v1
54.
MasAlexandrePallaisAmanda. 2017. Valuing alternative work arrangements. American Economic Review107(12): 3722–59.
55.
———. 2020. Alternative work arrangements. Annual Review of Economics12(1): 631–58.
56.
MoenPhyllisKellyErin L.FanWenLeeShi-RongAlmeidaDavidKossekEllen ErnstBuxtonOrfeu M.2016. Does a flexibility/support organizational initiative improve high-tech employees’ well-being? Evidence from the Work, Family, and Health Network. American Sociological Review81(1): 134–64.
57.
MoenPhyllisKellyErin L.LeeShi-RongOakesJ. MichaelFanWenBrayJeremyAlmeidaDavidHammerLeslieHurtadoDavidBuxtonOrfeu. 2017. Can a flexibility/support initiative reduce turnover intentions and exits? Results from the Work, Family, and Health Network. Social Problems64(1): 53–85.
58.
MunschChristin L.RidgewayCecilia L.WilliamsJoan C.2014. Pluralistic ignorance and the flexibility bias: Understanding and mitigating flextime and flexplace bias at work. Work and Occupations41(1): 40–62.
59.
NetemeyerRichard G.BolesJames S.McMurrianRobert. 1996. Development and validation of work–family conflict and family–work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology81(4): 400–410.
60.
NoonanMary C.EstesSarah BethGlassJennifer L.2007. Do workplace flexibility policies influence time spent in domestic labor?Journal of Family Issues28(2): 263–88.
61.
NoonanMary C.GlassJennifer. 2012. The hard truth about telecommuting. Monthly Labor Review135(June): 38–45.
62.
O’BradySeanDoellgastVirginia. 2021. Collective voice and worker well-being: Union influence on performance monitoring and emotional exhaustion in call centers. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society60(3): 307–37.
63.
Ollier-MalaterreArianeJacobsJerry A.RothbardNancy P.2019. Technology, work, and family: Digital cultural capital and boundary management. Annual Review of Sociology45: 425–47.
64.
Perry-JenkinsMaureenGerstelNaomi. 2020. Work and family in the second decade of the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family82(1): 420–53.
65.
PettsRichard J.CarlsonDaniel L.PepinJoanna R.2021. A gendered pandemic: Childcare, homeschooling, and parents’ employment during COVID-19. Gender, Work & Organization28(S2): 515–34.
ReidErin. 2015. Embracing, passing, revealing, and the ideal worker image: How people navigate expected and experienced professional identities. Organization Science26(4): 997–1017.
68.
RosenfieldSarahMouzonDawne. 2013. Gender and mental health. In AneshenselCarol S.PhelanJo C.BiermanAlex (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Mental Health, pp. 277–96. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
69.
SardeshmukhShruti R.SharmaDheerajGoldenTimothy D.2012. Impact of telework on exhaustion and job engagement: A job demands and job resources model. New Technology, Work and Employment27(3): 193–207.
70.
SchaufeliWilmar B.BakkerArnold B.SalanovaMarisa. 2006. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement66(4): 701–16.
71.
SchaufeliWilmar B.SalanovaMarisaGonzález-RomáVicenteBakkerArnold B.2002. The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies3(1): 71–92.
72.
SchiemanScottGlavinPaul. 2008. Trouble at the border? Gender, flexibility at work, and the work-home interface. Social Problems55(4): 590–611.
73.
SchiemanScottGlavinPaulMilkieMelissa A.2009. When work interferes with life: Work-nonwork interference and the influence of work-related demands and resources. American Sociological Review74(6): 966–88.
74.
SchiemanScottYoungMarisa C.2013. Are communications about work outside regular working hours associated with work-to-family conflict, psychological distress and sleep problems?Work & Stress27(3): 244–61.
75.
SongYounghwanGaoJia. 2020. Does telework stress employees out? A study on working at home and subjective well-being for wage/salary workers. Journal of Happiness Studies21(7): 2649–68.
76.
Ten BrummelhuisLieke L.BakkerArnold B.HetlandJørnKeulemansLiesbeth. 2012. Do new ways of working foster work engagement?Psicothema24(1): 113–20.
ToppChristian WintherØstergaardSøren DinesenSøndergaardSusanBechPer. 2015. The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: A systematic review of the literature. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics84(3): 167–76.
79.
TownsendNicholas. 2002. The Package Deal: Marriage, Work and Fatherhood in Men’s Lives. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
80.
Van der LippeTanjaLippényiZoltán. 2020a. Beyond formal access: Organizational context, working from home, and work–family conflict of men and women in European workplaces. Social Indicators Research151(2): 383–402.
81.
———. 2020b. Co-workers working from home and individual and team performance. New Technology, Work and Employment35(1): 60–79.
82.
VoydanoffPatricia. 2004. The effects of work demands and resources on work-to-family conflict and facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family66(2): 398–412.
83.
———. 2005. Consequences of boundary-spanning demands and resources for work-to-family conflict and perceived stress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology10(4): 491–503.
84.
WilliamsJoan C.Blair-LoyMaryBerdahlJennifer L.2013. Cultural schemas, social class, and the flexibility stigma. Journal of Social Issues69(2): 209–34.
85.
YangLongqiHoltzDavidJaffeSoniaSuriSiddharthSinhaShilpiWestonJeffreyJoyceConnor, et al. 2022. The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. Nature Human Behaviour6(1): 43–54.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
