THE IMPACT OF HYBRID AND REMOTE FORMS OF WORK ON WORK MOTIVATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING OF ORGANIZATIONAL PERSONNEL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/3041-2021/2025-3-8Keywords:
hybrid and remote work, work motivation, psychological well-being, work well-being, personal and professional self-determination, mental health, organizational cultureAbstract
The article analyzes and systematizes the results of modern interdisciplinary research on the impact of hybrid and remote forms of work organization on personal and professional self-determination and psychological and labor well-being of employees. The relevance of the topic is due to the large-scale spread of these formats due to global labor market transformations and the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their transformation into a long-term strategy for many organizations. The analysis of scientific sources made it possible to state both positive and negative aspects of the impact of new work models on the motivation and sense of well-being of organizational personnel. On the one hand, they can contribute to increasing employee autonomy, flexibility in the distribution of working time, improving well-being and maintaining labor productivity, and are also potentially capable of reducing staff turnover. On the other hand, they are accompanied by certain risks: blurred boundaries between the professional and personal spheres of life, which leads to an increase in the level of information and psychological stress and emotional exhaustion of employees; increased feelings of social isolation, anxiety, depression and professional burnout, especially in conditions of long-term and fully remote work; the emergence of “digital fatigue”. It has been established that the effectiveness of adaptation largely depends on individual self-management skills, professional self-determination, the quality of organizational support (clarity of policies, communication, culture of trust), as well as socio-cultural factors, including gender aspects and the availability of flexible formats for different categories of employees. The conclusion is made about the need to introduce a comprehensive, person- centered approach to managing hybrid and remote work formats, which takes into account the interaction of individual, organizational and socio-psychological factors to ensure both the effectiveness of professional activity and the labor and psychological well-being of employees.
References
Al-Azzam M., Hussein R. A., Obeidat R. et al. Predictors of employee well-being in remote working settings: a public health perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2023. Vol. 28 (3). Р. 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000349.
Allen T. D., Golden T. D., Shockley K. M. How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2015. Vol. 16 (2). Р. 40–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615593273.
Aruldoss M., Lakshmi T. M., Venkatesh R. Work-life balance and psychological well-being: a moderated mediation model among IT employees. Frontiers in Psychology. 2024. Vol. 15. Article 1275683. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1275683.
Bloom N., Han R., Liang J., Roberts J. Hybrid work is a win-win-win for companies, workers, and society. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. 2024. URL: https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2024/06/hybrid-work-is-a-win-win-win-for-companies-workers.
Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology. 2008. Vol. 49 (3). Р. 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801.
Kossek E. E., Ruderman M. N., Braddy P. W., Hannum K. M. Work-nonwork boundary management profiles: A person-centered approach. Gender, Work & Organization. 2022. Vol. 29 (1). Р. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12745.
Mental Health Foundation. Remote working and mental health: Evidence briefing. London, 2023. URL: https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/explore-mental-health/publications/remote-working-and-mental-health.
Mayo Elton. The social problems of an industrial civilization. London : Routledge, 1998. 200 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315824277.
Oakman J., Kinsman N., Stuckey R. et al. A rapid review of mental and physical health effects of working at home: how do we optimise health? Frontiers in Psychology. 2020. Vol. 11. Article 2560. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00256.
Rudolph C. W., Allan B. A., Clarke M. M., Hertel G. A meta-analysis of work-life balance and wellbeing outcomes: Examining the moderating effects of gender and culture. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2021. Vol. 126. Article 103516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103516.
Vitality. Hybrid workers take fewer sick days than those in the office. The Times. 2024. URL: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hybrid-workers-take-fewer-sick-days-than-those-in-the-office-kz0hp2hb0.
WorkLifeWell Research Project. Disengagement in remote workplaces: psychological mechanisms and leadership implications. Research Briefing Series. 2023. University of Leeds. https://worklifewell.leeds.ac.uk/documents/briefing3.pdf.
Zalat M. M., Hamed M. S., Bolbol S. A. Impact of remote work on mental health: a systematic review. Sustainability. 2023. Vol. 15, № 18. Article 8278. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15188278.





