The detachment paradox: Employers recognize the benefits of detachment for employee well-being and performance, yet penalize it in employee evaluations
{"title":"The detachment paradox: Employers recognize the benefits of detachment for employee well-being and performance, yet penalize it in employee evaluations","authors":"Eva C. Buechel , Elisa Solinas","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The present research establishes what we call the “detachment paradox.” Managers recognize that psychological detachment from work during non-work hours benefits workers’ well-being and, critically, enhances their performance during working hours. Yet, these same managers penalize employees who are perceived to detach when evaluating their promotability. Using a variety of methodologies across 16 studies, we test the existence and the boundaries of this paradox. The detachment paradox is observed among various samples ranging from experienced managers to lay individuals, for commonly used detachment strategies (e.g., out-of-office emails, requesting vacation days), for hypothetical workers as well as for managers’ own workers, and even when detachment strategies are used for virtuous reasons (e.g., taking care of a sick relative). In addition, these studies establish that inferences about commitment to work drive the associated detachment penalty. Accordingly, workers are penalized less if detachment strategies are used for reasons that indicate a commitment to work. Lastly, we provide initial evidence that implementing formalized detachment policies (e.g., no emails over weekends) may reduce the detachment penalty and call for future research on this important topic.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"188 ","pages":"Article 104403"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597825000159","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The present research establishes what we call the “detachment paradox.” Managers recognize that psychological detachment from work during non-work hours benefits workers’ well-being and, critically, enhances their performance during working hours. Yet, these same managers penalize employees who are perceived to detach when evaluating their promotability. Using a variety of methodologies across 16 studies, we test the existence and the boundaries of this paradox. The detachment paradox is observed among various samples ranging from experienced managers to lay individuals, for commonly used detachment strategies (e.g., out-of-office emails, requesting vacation days), for hypothetical workers as well as for managers’ own workers, and even when detachment strategies are used for virtuous reasons (e.g., taking care of a sick relative). In addition, these studies establish that inferences about commitment to work drive the associated detachment penalty. Accordingly, workers are penalized less if detachment strategies are used for reasons that indicate a commitment to work. Lastly, we provide initial evidence that implementing formalized detachment policies (e.g., no emails over weekends) may reduce the detachment penalty and call for future research on this important topic.
期刊介绍:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context