Organizations arrange telecommuting work conditions for their employees during unprecedented times but do not want to see employees with lower commitment levels. The present study finds how home-based teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced telecommuters’ organizational commitment. Using quantitative research techniques, the study approached 412 telecommuters working in the Indian IT sector to collect the responses to the survey questionnaire statements. A purposive sampling method was applied to select the sample. The structural equation model technique was used to test the hypothesized model. Results from the study indicate that home-based teleworking as a current working condition of the telecommuter showed a significant adverse effect on affective commitment. Organizational commitment may result in employee psychological connection with an organization, feeling obligated to stay with an organization, and perceived benefits from the organization, but when an organizational work environment shifted from a physical location to work from home, these commitments resulted in different ways. In contrast, it positively impacted telecommuters’ normative and continuance commitment. Further, the telecommuter’s gender moderates the relationship between telecommuting working conditions and normative and continuance commitment but not affective commitment. However, the telecommuter’s family status moderates the relationship between teleworking working conditions and affective and continuance commitment but not normative commitment. It is recommended that organizations that are interested in having more employee commitment during unprecedented times should induce a rich communication technology to enrich the emotional connection (affective commitment), make feel responsibility and responsible (normative commitment), and nurture the policies and structures to see employee perceive more benefits for career and professional development.
BlahopoulouJ, Ortiz-BonninS, Montañez-JuanM. Telework satisfaction, wellbeing and performance in the digital era. Lessons learned during COVID-19 lockdown in Spain. Curr Psychol, 2022; 41(5): 2507–2520.
2.
TonD, ArendsenK, de BruynM. Teleworking during COVID-19 in the Netherlands: Understanding behaviour, attitudes, and future intentions of train travellers. Transp Res Part A: Policy Pract, 2022; 159: 55–73.
3.
Diab-BahmanR and Al-EnziA. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on conventional work settings. Int J Sociol Soc Policy, 2020Dec2; 40(9/10): 909–27.
4.
PanW, XieT, WangZ. Digital economy: An innovation driver for total factor productivity. J Bus Res, 2022; 139: 303–311.
5.
WangW, AlbertL and SunQ.Employee isolation and telecommuter organizational commitment. Empl Relat: Int J, 2020Mar26; 42(3): 609–25.
6.
NillesJM. Making telecommuting happen: A guide for telemanagers and telecommuters. New York, NY: VanNostrand Reinhold, 1994.
7.
AndriessenJH. Mediated communication and new organizational forms. In: CooperCL and RobertsonIT (eds) International review of industrial and organizational psychology. John Wiley & Sons, 1991, pp.17–70.
8.
MollaR. How remote work is quietly remaking our lives. Viitattu, 2019; 18: 2020.
9.
OzcelikH and BarsadeS.Work loneliness and employee performance. In: West meets east: Enlightening. Balancing. Transcending 2011 Proceedings of the academy of management annual meeting, San Antonio. New York: AOM, pp. 1–6.
10.
MetselaarSA, den DulkL and VermeerenB.Teleworking at different locations outside the office: Consequences for perceived performance and the mediating role of autonomy and work-life balance satisfaction. Rev Public Pers Adm, 2023; 43(3): 456–478.
11.
WeinertC and WeitzelT.Teleworking in the Covid-19 pandemic: The effects of life-work conflict on job outcomes and the role of the IT telework environment. Bus Inf Syst Eng, 2023Mar17: 1–20.
12.
BartelCA, WrzesniewskiA and WiesenfeldBM. Knowing where you stand: Physical isolation, perceived respect, and organizational identification among virtual employees. Organ Sci, 2012; 23(3): 743–757.
13.
NazirS, ShafiA, QunW, . Influence of organizational rewards on organizational commitment and turnover intentions. Empl Relat: Int J, 2016; 38(4): 596–619.
14.
MeyerJP, StanleyDJ, HerscovitchL, . Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. J Vocat Behav2002; 61(1): 20–52.
15.
NillesJM. Telecommunications-transportation tradeoff: Options for tomorrow. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1976.
16.
KellyMM. Next workplace revolution: Telecommuting. Superv Manage1985, 30; 2–7.
17.
MoonC and StanworthS.Flexible working in Europe. The case of teleworking in the UK. Quaderni di psicologia del lavoro, 1997; 5: 337–344.
18.
HuwsU. Teleworking: Facing up to the future. Health Saf Information Bull, 1994; 223: 9–11.
19.
TavaresF, SantosE and DiogoA, . Teleworking in Portuguese communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Enterp Communities, 2021Jun21; 15(3): 334–49
20.
ThulinE, VilhelmsonB and JohanssonM.New telework. Time pressure and time use control in everyday life. Sustainability, 2019; 11: 3067.
21.
LuX, TuY, LiY, . Affective and normative forces between HCHRM and turnover intention in China. Empl Relat, 2016: 38(5): 741–754.
22.
SchoemmelK and JønssonTS. Multiple affective commitments: Quitting intentions and job performance. Empl Relat, 2014; 36(5): 516–534.
23.
MeyerJP and AllenNJ. A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Hum Resour Manag Rev, 1991; 1(1): 61–89.
24.
GoldenTD. Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Telework and the intervening impact of work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions. J Vocat Behav, 2006; 69(1): 176–187.
25.
JønssonT and JeppesenHJ. A closer look into the employee influence: Organizational commitment relationship by distinguishing between commitment forms and influence sources. Empl Relat, 2013; 35(1): 4–19.
26.
OhanaM and MeyerM.Distributive justice and affective commitment in nonprofit organizations: Which referent matters?Empl Relat . 2016; 38(6): 841–858.
27.
JacobsG. Constructing corporate commitment amongst remote employees: A disposition and predisposition approach. Corp Commun: Int J, 2008; 13(1): 42–55.
28.
LawlerEJ and YoonJ.Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. Am Sociol Rev, 1996; 61(1): 89–108.
29.
ThyeSR, VincentA, LawlerEJ, . Relational cohesion, social commitments, and person-to-group ties: Twenty-five years of a theoretical research program. In: Advances in group processes 2014 (Vol. 31). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2014; pp. 99–138..
30.
GrantCA, WallaceLM and SpurgeonPC. An exploration of the psychological factors affecting remote e‐worker’s job effectiveness, well‐being and work‐life balance. Empl Relat, 2013Aug9; 35(5): 527–46.
31.
DurbinS and TomlinsonJ.Female part-time managers: networks and career mobility. Work Employ Soc, 2010; 24(4): 621–640.
32.
LeonardiPM, TreemJW and JacksonMH. The connectivity paradox: Using technology to both decrease and increase perceptions of distance in distributed work arrangements. J Appl Commun Res, 2010; 38(1): 85–105.
33.
CooperCD and KurlandNB. Telecommuting, professional isolation, and employee development in public and private organizations. J. Organ. Behav, 2002; 23(4): 511–532.
34.
GoldenTD and VeigaJF. The impact of extent of telecommuting on job satisfaction: Resolving inconsistent findings. J Manag, 2005; 31(2): 301–318.
35.
Reinsch JrNL. Relationships between telecommuting workers and their managers: An exploratory study. J Bus Commun, 1997; 34(4): 343–367.
36.
AydinA, SarierY and UysalS.The effect of gender on organizational commitment of teachers: A meta-analytic analysis. Educ Sci: Theory Pract, 2011; 11(2): 628–632.
37.
KarraschAI. Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment. Mil Psychol, 2003; 15(3): 225–236.
38.
KorkmazT and MengeS.The impact of workplace spirituality on organizational commitment at schools: The moderating effect of gender. Eur J Educ Manag, 2018; 1(1): 9–16.
39.
ArbakY and KeskenJ. Organizational commitment in health services a behavioral approach to continuous improvement. Izmir: Nine Eylul University Press, 2005.
40.
KamerM.Organizational trust, organizational commitment and organizational effects on citizenship behavior. Unpublished High Undergraduate Thesis, Istanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, Istanbul, 2001.
41.
DixonMA, CunninghamGB, SagasM, . Challenge is key: An investigation of affective organizational commitment in undergraduate interns. J Educ Bus, 2005; 80(3): 172–180.
42.
BalayR. Managers and teachers in private and public high schools organizational commitment. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Ankara University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara, 2000.
43.
Blair-LoyM. Competing devotions: Career and family among women executives. Harvard University Press, 2009.
44.
RothLM. Opting out? Why women really quit careers and head home. 2009, pp. 916–918.
45.
PetriglieriJ. Couples that work: How dual-career couples can thrive in love and work. Harvard Business Press, 2019.
46.
GoldenTD, VeigaJF and DinoRN. The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter?J Appl Psychol, 2008; 93(6): 1412.
47.
HairJ, BlackWC, BabinBJ, . Multivariate data analysis. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2010.
48.
PedhazurEJ and SchmelkinLP. Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Psychology Press, 2013.
49.
McDonaldRP and HoMH. Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol Methods, 2002; 7(1): 64.
50.
Churchill JrGA. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res, 1979; 16(1): 64–73.
51.
FornellCG and LarckerDF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res, 1981;18: 39–50.
52.
KennedyP. A guide to econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
53.
ByrneBM. Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Sage, 1994.
54.
MarshHW, BallaJR and HauKT. An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical properties. In Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques. Psychology Press, 1996, pp. 315–353.
55.
SchreiberJB, StageFK, KingJ. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J Educ Res, 2006;99: 323–337.
56.
BowlbyJ. The nature of the child’s tie to his mother. Int J Psychoanal1958; 39: 350–373.
57.
KesslerEH, ed. Encyclopedia of management theory. Sage Publications, 2013.
58.
MaslowAH. A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev, 1943; 50(4): 370.
59.
BaumeisterRF and LearyMR. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull, 1995; 117(3): 497.
60.
DeSanctisG and MongeP.Introduction to the special issue: Communication processes for virtual organizations. Organ Sci, 1999;10(6): 693–703.
61.
RiceRE and GattikerUE. New media and organizational structuring. In The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods. Sage, 2001, pp. 544–581.
