Smart work. Supporting employees’ flexibility through ICT, HR practices and office layout
| Published date | 05 December 2016 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-01-2016-0004 |
| Pages | 240-256 |
| Date | 05 December 2016 |
| Author | Elisabetta Raguseo,Luca Gastaldi,Paolo Neirotti |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
Smart work
Supporting employees’flexibility through
ICT, HR practices and office layout
Elisabetta Raguseo
Management of Technology and Strategy Department,
Grenoble Ecole de Management, Grenoble, France
Luca Gastaldi
Department of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering,
Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy, and
Paolo Neirotti
Department of Management and Production Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy
Abstract
Purpose –This paper explores smart work (SW), a work practice characterized by spatial and
temporal flexibility, supported by technological tools, and that provides all employees of an
organization with the best working conditions to accomplish their tasks. Specifically, the purpose of
this paper is to identify whether firms adopt different SW models, explore complementarities between
the factors that can lead to choose a SW model, and figure out whether contingent variables matters in
the implementation of a particular SW model.
Design/methodology/approach –This study is based on: a survey delivered in 2013 to 100 Human
Resources directors of medium and large Italian organizations to collect preliminary evidence on SW;
and four embedded case studies based on 49 semi-structured interviews to better explain the findings
achieved in the quantitative analysis.
Findings –Four SW models can be chosen by companies. They are named inconsistent, analogical,
digital and complete SW. They are different according to investments in the enabling digital
technologies, in trans-formations of the organizational policies and in workspace settings,
according the contingent conditions where firms operate. Results show that there are
complementarities between the elements that characterize a SW model and that at least two
elements are developed in each SW model. In case all the three elements are developed,companies
achieve higher labour productivity.
Originality/value –The paper unpacks the elements that can generate SW environments by deepening
the complementarities that can be exploited among information and communication technologies,
work place and work practice innovation, and by evaluating their development on employees’performance.
Keywords ICT, Human resource practices, Office layout, Smart work
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The methods and tools through which work practices are accomplished have changed
dramatically in the last decade (Hamel, 2012). Successful organizations are increasingly
characterized by the ability to abandon now inappropriate working configurations
(Birkinshaw et al., 2008) to support new organizational principles, such as emerging
collaboration (Vlaar et al., 2008), higher mobility of workers (Neirotti et al., 2013),
autonomy in the choices of work settings (Leonardi and Bailey, 2008), spatial and
temporal flexibility (Hoeven and Zoonen, 2015), and talent enhancement, responsibility
Evidence-based HRM: a Global
Forum for Empirical Scholarship
Vol. 4 No. 3, 2016
pp. 240-256
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2049-3983
DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-01-2016-0004
Received 28 January 2016
Revised 15 April 2016
Accepted 29 May 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm
An earlier version of this paper was presented at IFKAD and CINet conferences in 2014.
240
EBHRM
4,3
and widespread innovation (Gastaldi et al., 2015), taking into account several trade-offs
and tensions that are behind the adoption of new work practices characterized by high
levels of flexibility (Raguseo et al., 2015).
According to Birkinshaw (2010) if, on the one hand, organizations tend to
manifest inertial behaviours in dealing with this paradigm shift, on the other hand,
they are consistently looking for elements to balance new business targets with the
evolving needs of their employees (Leonardi, 2011). In fact, the generation of
value within the business domain is no longer linked only to insightful
business models (McGrath, 2013), but also to how employees actually create,
perceive, realize, defend and evolve these business models in day-by-day activities
(Corso et al., 2013) –especially in highly turbulent competitive environments
(Eisenhardt and Brown, 1998).
Actually, most of the innovation potential of employees remain unexpressed due to
inappropriate organizational models (Oksanen and Ståhle, 2013), and an increasing
number of firms are rethinking these organizational models, referring to the emerging
ones with the term “Smart Work (SW)”(Plantronics, 2014). Specifically, a SW
corresponds to a work practice that is characterized by spatial and temporal
flexibility (Fogarty et al., 2011), supported by technological tools, and that provides
all employees of an organization with the best working conditions to accomplish their
tasks (Kim and Oh, 2015).
Given that the literature is scant in investigating SW practices, the purpose of this
paper is threefold: identifying the different SW configurations adopted by firms ;
figuring out whether contingent variables matter in the implementation of a SW model;
and exploring complementarities between the elements affecting these configurations
by understanding their impact on firm performance. In order to achieve these goals, we
complement qualitative and quantitative analyses.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we discuss the theoretical
background. In Section 3, we show the research methodology and the data measures
used to collect and analyse empirical facts on SW phenomenon. In Section 4, we discuss
the key findings of the quantitative and qualitative analyses. Finally, we conclude the
paper with empirical and theoretical implications of the findings and directions for
future research that it could be interesting to pursue.
2. Theoretical background
The concept of SW finds its origin in the literature stream studying the application
of non-traditional and flexible work practices and locations for carrying out work
(e.g. Van der Voordt, 2004; Gorgievski et al., 2010). Authors in this stream assert
that modern companies strive to provide flexible work arrangements and more cost
efficient and creative office environments in order to support competitiveness
and employee productivity without decreasing job satisfaction (Beauregard
and Henry, 2009).
Even if there are still mixed results on the impact that these non-convention al
practices have on employees’extrinsic career success (Leslie et al., 2012), many firms
are increasingly exploring models to fully leverage on their employees (Rockmann
and Pratt, 2015), while new entrepreneurial opportunities and business models are
emerging –e.g., the co-working office spaces with related services proposed by
WeWork (www.wework.com).
Within these extremely dynamic settings, companies (e.g. Plantronics, 2014) start
referring to “SW”as a set of organizational interventions aiming to fully release the
241
Smart work:
supporting
employees’
flexibility
To continue reading
Request your trial