{"title":"The end of boundaries: Technovation, technostress, and the rise of the neo work-life domain","authors":"Toyin Ajibade Adisa, Gbolahan Gbadamosi, Kareem Folohunso Sani, Benjamin Laker, Opeoluwa Aiyenitaju","doi":"10.1177/00187267261482002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Do digital boundaries still exist, or have mobile devices permanently collapsed the threshold between office and home? In this era of pervasive technovation, the traditional separation between professional and personal lives is undergoing a qualitative ontological collapse. Moving beyond the ‘boundary-blurring’ narrative, we theorise the generative mechanism behind this collapse: the sociomaterial entanglement of technological affordances, neoliberal organisational norms, and worker habitus. Drawing on a qualitative study of 42 UK professionals that uses the Gioia methodology, we analyse how hyperconnectivity reconfigures the work-life interface into a state of indistinction. Our findings reveal that employees adopt deliberate integration not as a preference but as a structural survival strategy within a high-responsiveness culture, facilitating the neo work-life domain. We conceptualise this neo work-life domain as a unitary, nomadic space where roles are perpetually concurrent and structured by an internalised professional habitus. Living within this neo work-life domain produces deeply paradoxical outcomes: While providing vital ICT resources, it generates compounded technostress, an environment where simultaneous stressors overwhelm cognitive recovery. Because compounded technostress triggers acute psychological risks, our primary theoretical contribution proposes that contemporary labour has fundamentally shifted from boundary management to attention management. We define ‘attention management’ as the cognitive filtering of role simultaneity and argue that it represents the final contested terrain of modern work. We conclude by highlighting the UK’s institutional ‘void’ and underscoring the urgent need for structural interventions, such as a statutory ‘right to disconnect’, to protect cognitive autonomy in a borderless neo work-life domain.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267261482002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Do digital boundaries still exist, or have mobile devices permanently collapsed the threshold between office and home? In this era of pervasive technovation, the traditional separation between professional and personal lives is undergoing a qualitative ontological collapse. Moving beyond the ‘boundary-blurring’ narrative, we theorise the generative mechanism behind this collapse: the sociomaterial entanglement of technological affordances, neoliberal organisational norms, and worker habitus. Drawing on a qualitative study of 42 UK professionals that uses the Gioia methodology, we analyse how hyperconnectivity reconfigures the work-life interface into a state of indistinction. Our findings reveal that employees adopt deliberate integration not as a preference but as a structural survival strategy within a high-responsiveness culture, facilitating the neo work-life domain. We conceptualise this neo work-life domain as a unitary, nomadic space where roles are perpetually concurrent and structured by an internalised professional habitus. Living within this neo work-life domain produces deeply paradoxical outcomes: While providing vital ICT resources, it generates compounded technostress, an environment where simultaneous stressors overwhelm cognitive recovery. Because compounded technostress triggers acute psychological risks, our primary theoretical contribution proposes that contemporary labour has fundamentally shifted from boundary management to attention management. We define ‘attention management’ as the cognitive filtering of role simultaneity and argue that it represents the final contested terrain of modern work. We conclude by highlighting the UK’s institutional ‘void’ and underscoring the urgent need for structural interventions, such as a statutory ‘right to disconnect’, to protect cognitive autonomy in a borderless neo work-life domain.
期刊介绍:
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.