Hybrid work design profiles: Antecedents and well-being outcomes

Abstract

Hybrid work is fast emerging as the future of work. Yet, it is not clear how key work design characteristics that are salient in hybrid work, namely scheduling autonomy, social support, workload, and close monitoring, are experienced in the home compared to the workplace for hybrid workers, and how these work characteristics combine holistically to influence well-being. We adopted a novel approach and measured work characteristics as experienced at home and, separately, as experienced at the workplace. For a sample of hybrid workers (n = 386), latent profile analysis revealed four profiles of work design characteristics. Two profiles had similar work characteristics at home and the workplace. One of these profiles, labelled ‘active, low monitoring’, had very positive work characteristics across both locations, and was associated with the highest flourishing and mental health. The other profile, labelled ‘passive, high monitoring’, had very poor work design across both locations, and was associated with the lowest flourishing and mental health. The other two profiles diverged in work characteristic levels across locations. One profile, labelled ‘high strain, high monitoring’ had poor work design that was worse in the workplace, and one profile, labelled ‘low strain, low monitoring’, had better work design that was better at the workplace. Employees with more influence over their work location, and those with high organisational support, were likely to be in the most positive profile (active, low monitoring), suggesting these are important factors for creating positive work design irrespective of location.