While telework has been adopted widely in local governments because of the numerous potential benefits that it offers for the workforce, organizations, and society, little research has been done to examine if and how telework achieves expected worker outcomes in local governments. Drawing on insights from the social exchange and social exclusion theories, this article extends previous telework research by demonstrating the differential effects of telecommute and telework options on job satisfaction and performance of local government workforce. Data were collected through an online survey of workers at a large local government agency in California. Results showed that telework and telecommute options improved job satisfaction and performance of workers in the local government agency due to flexible work schedules and locations. In addition, telecommuters having more interpersonal interaction opportunities which reduce feelings of social isolation/work alienation experienced higher job satisfaction and performance than teleworkers.
AllenT. D.GoldenT. D.ShockleyK. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(2), 40–68.
2.
Anderfuhren-BigetS.VaroneF.GiauqueD.RitzA. (2010). Motivating employees of the public sector: Does public service motivation matter?International Public Management Journal, 13(3), 213–246.
3.
BaeK. B.KimD. (2016). The impact of decoupling of telework on job satisfaction in US federal agencies: Does gender matter?The American Review of Public Administration, 46(3), 356–371.
4.
BaumeisterR. F.TiceD. M. (1990). Anxiety and social exclusion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(2), 165–195.
5.
BermanE. M.BowmanJ. S.WestJ. P.Van WartM. R. (2016). Human resource management in public service: Paradoxes, processes, and problems. SAGE.
6.
BrysonJ. M. (1988). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations. Jossey-Bass Inc.
7.
CaillierJ. G. (2012). The impact of teleworking on work motivation in a U. S. federal government agency. American Review of Public Administration, 42(4), 461–480.
8.
CaillierJ. G. (2013). Are teleworkers less likely to report leave intentions in the United States federal government than non-teleworkers are?American Review of Public Administration, 43(1), 72–88.
9.
DahlstromT. R. (2013). Telecommuting and leadership style. Public Personnel Management, 42(3), 438–451.
10.
DenhardtR. B. (1995). Public administration: An action orientation (2nd ed.). Wadsworth Publishing Company.
FuenzalidaJ.RiccucciN. (2018). The effects of politicization on performance: The mediating role of HRM practices. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(4), 544–569.
13.
GouldnerA. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161–178
14.
Getha-TaylorH.LeeJ. (2008). Changing competencies for human resource management: Examining e-government scorecard and Federal Human Capital Survey evidence. International Journal of Public Sector Performance Management, 1(2), 150–166.
15.
Gould-WilliamsJ.DaviesF. (2007). Using social exchange theory to predict the effects of HRM practice on employee outcomes. Public Management Review, 7(1), 1–24.
16.
HaasD. F.DeseranF. A. (1981). Trust and symbolic exchange. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44(1), 3–13.
17.
HuntonJ. E.NormanC. S. (2010). The impact of alternative telework arrangements on organizational commitment: Insights from a longitudinal field experiment. Journal of Information Systems, 24(1), 67–90.
18.
HillE. J.MillerB. C.WeinerS. P.ColihanJ. (1998). Influences of the virtual office on aspects of work and work/life balance. Personnel Psychology, 51(3), 667–683.
19.
IgbariaM.GuimaraesT. (1999). Exploring differences in employee turnover intentions and its determinants among telecommuters and non-telecommuters. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(1), 147–164.
KanterR. (1983). Frontiers for strategic human resource planning and management. Human Resource Management, 22(1–2), 9–21.
22.
KimJ.WigginsM. E. (2011). Family-friendly human resource policy: Is it still working in the public sector?Public Administration Review, 71(5), 728–739.
23.
KlingnerD. E.NalbandianJ.LlorensJ. J. (2010). Public personnel management: Contexts and strategies (6th ed.). Routledge.
24.
KrollA.MoynihanD. P. (2015). Does training matter? Evidence from performance management reforms. Public Administration Review, 75(3), 411–420.
25.
KwonM.ChoY. J.SongH. J. (2019). How do managerial, task, and individual factors influence flexible work arrangement participation and abandonment?Asian Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 59(4), 645–668. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12251
26.
KwonM.JeonS. H. (2017). Why permit telework? Determinants of California city governments’ decisions to permit telework. Public Personnel Management, 46(3), 239–262.
27.
KwonM.JeonS. H. (2020). Do leadership commitment and performance oriented culture matter for federal teleworker satisfaction with telework programs?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(1), 36–55.
28.
KwonMJeonS. H.TingY. (2020). The impact of predisposed traits and organizational factors on the U.S. federal employee perception of whistleblowing. Public Personnel Management, 50(2), 258–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026020938828
29.
LearyM. R. (1990). Responses to social exclusion: Social anxiety, jealousy, loneliness, depression, and low self-esteem. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(2), 221–229.
30.
LeeD.KimS. Y. (2016). A quasi-experimental examination of telework eligibility and participation in the U.S. federal government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(4), 451–471.
31.
LeeS. Y.HongJ. H. (2011). Does family-friendly policy matter? Testing its impact on turnover and performance. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 870–879.
32.
LongS. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. SAGE.
33.
MaruyamaT.HopkinsonP. G.JamesP. W. (2009). A multivariate analysis of work–life balance outcomes from a large-scale telework programme. New Technology, Work and Employment, 24(1), 76–88.
34.
MahlerJ. (2012). The telework divide: Managerial and personnel challenges of telework. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(4), 407–418.
35.
MintzbergH. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning. The Free Press.
36.
MintzbergH.LampelL.QuinnJ.GhoshalS. (2003). The strategic process (4th ed.). Prentice Hall Publishing.
OvermyerS. P. (2011). Implementing telework: Lessons learned from four federal agencies. IBM Center for the Business of Government.
39.
PerezM. P.SánchezA. M.CarnicerM. P. D. L.JiménezM. J. V. (2004). The environmental impacts of teleworking: A model of urban analysis and a case study. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 15(6), 656–671.
TorracoR. J. (2005). Work design theory: A review and critique with implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(1), 85–109.
VyasL.ButakhieoN. (2021). The impact of working from home during COVID-19 on work and life domains: an exploratory study on Hong Kong. Policy Design and Practice, 4(1), 59–76.
45.
WadsworthL. L.FacerR. L.ArbonC. A. (2010). Alternative work schedules in local government: Cui bono?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30(3), 322–340.
46.
WeibelA.RostK.OsterlohM. (2010). Pay for performance in the public sector-benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 387–412.
47.
WeinertC.MaierC.LaumerS. (2015). Why are teleworkers stressed? An empirical analysis of the causes of telework-enabled stress. In OliverT.TeutebergF. (Eds.), Proceedings der 12. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp.1407–1421). Universität Osnabrück.
