covid-19 and the workplace: implications, issues, and ... files/covid19...covid-19 is both a global...
TRANSCRIPT
-
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343584534
COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future
research and action
Article in American Psychologist · August 2020
DOI: 10.1037/amp0000716
CITATIONS
0READS
206
29 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Business and Society View project
Technology and Interpersonal Relationships View project
Frederik Anseel
UNSW Sydney
106 PUBLICATIONS 3,104 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
John Antonakis
University of Lausanne
140 PUBLICATIONS 7,146 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Peter A. Bamberger
Tel Aviv University
165 PUBLICATIONS 5,047 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Hari Bapuji
University of Melbourne
43 PUBLICATIONS 1,002 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Cort W. Rudolph on 17 August 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343584534_COVID-19_and_the_workplace_Implications_issues_and_insights_for_future_research_and_action?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/343584534_COVID-19_and_the_workplace_Implications_issues_and_insights_for_future_research_and_action?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_3&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/project/Business-and-Society-3?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_9&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/project/Technology-and-Interpersonal-Relationships?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_9&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_1&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frederik_Anseel?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frederik_Anseel?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/UNSW_Sydney?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frederik_Anseel?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Antonakis?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Antonakis?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Lausanne?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Antonakis?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Bamberger?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Bamberger?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/Tel_Aviv_University?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Bamberger?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hari_Bapuji?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hari_Bapuji?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Melbourne?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hari_Bapuji?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cort_Rudolph2?enrichId=rgreq-db2fc3bc1eaf4a67477bafc0a226fc6c-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzM0MzU4NDUzNDtBUzo5MjU2NTE4NDIzNzU2ODFAMTU5NzcwNDAwNTczOQ%3D%3D&el=1_x_10&_esc=publicationCoverPdf
-
American PsychologistCOVID-19 and the Workplace: Implications, Issues, andInsights for Future Research and ActionKevin M. Kniffin, Jayanth Narayanan, Frederik Anseel, John Antonakis, Susan P. Ashford, Arnold B.Bakker, Peter Bamberger, Hari Bapuji, Devasheesh P. Bhave, Virginia K. Choi, Stephanie J. Creary,Evangelia Demerouti, Francis J. Flynn, Michele J. Gelfand, Lindred L. Greer, Gary Johns, SelinKesebir, Peter G. Klein, Sun Young Lee, Hakan Ozcelik, Jennifer Louise Petriglieri, Nancy P.Rothbard, Cort W. Rudolph, Jason D. Shaw, Nina Sirola, Connie R. Wanberg, Ashley Whillans,Michael P. Wilmot, and Mark van VugtOnline First Publication, August 10, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
CITATIONKniffin, K. M., Narayanan, J., Anseel, F., Antonakis, J., Ashford, S. P., Bakker, A. B., Bamberger, P.,Bapuji, H., Bhave, D. P., Choi, V. K., Creary, S. J., Demerouti, E., Flynn, F. J., Gelfand, M. J., Greer, L. L.,Johns, G., Kesebir, S., Klein, P. G., Lee, S. Y., Ozcelik, H., Petriglieri, J. L., Rothbard, N. P., Rudolph, C.W., Shaw, J. D., Sirola, N., Wanberg, C. R., Whillans, A., Wilmot, M. P., & Vugt, M. v. (2020, August10). COVID-19 and the Workplace: Implications, Issues, and Insights for Future Research andAction. American Psychologist. Advance online publication.http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
-
COVID-19 and the Workplace:Implications, Issues, and Insights for Future Research and Action
Kevin M. KniffinCornell University
Jayanth NarayananNational University of Singapore
Frederik AnseelUniversity of New South Wales Sydney
John AntonakisUniversity of Lausanne
Susan P. AshfordUniversity of Michigan
Arnold B. BakkerErasmus University Rotterdam
Peter BambergerTel Aviv University and Cornell University
Hari BapujiUniversity of Melbourne
Devasheesh P. BhaveSingapore Management University
Virginia K. ChoiUniversity of Maryland, College Park
Stephanie J. CrearyUniversity of Pennsylvania
Evangelia DemeroutiEindhoven University of Technology
Francis J. FlynnStanford University
Michele J. GelfandUniversity of Maryland, College Park
Lindred L. GreerUniversity of Michigan
Gary JohnsConcordia University and University of British Columbia
Kevin M. Kniffin, Dyson School of Applied Economics and Manage-ment, S. C. Johnson College of Business, Cornell University; X JayanthNarayanan, Department of Management and Organizations, National Uni-versity of Singapore; X Frederik Anseel, Business School, University ofNew South Wales Sydney; X John Antonakis, Department of Organiza-tional Behavior, University of Lausanne; X Susan P. Ashford, Stephen M.Ross School of Business, University of Michigan; X Arnold B. Bakker,Center of Excellence for Positive Organizational Psychology, ErasmusUniversity Rotterdam; X Peter Bamberger, Coller School of Manage-ment, Tel Aviv University, and Smithers Institute, Cornell University;X Hari Bapuji, Department of Management and Marketing, University ofMelbourne; X Devasheesh P. Bhave, Department of Organizational Be-haviour and Human Resources, Singapore Management University; Vir-ginia K. Choi, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, CollegePark; Stephanie J. Creary, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylva-nia; X Evangelia Demerouti, Department of Industrial Engineering andInnovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology; Francis J.Flynn, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University; Michele J.
Gelfand, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, CollegePark; X Lindred L. Greer, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, Uni-versity of Michigan; Gary Johns, John Molson School of Business,Concordia University, and Sauder School of Business, University ofBritish Columbia; X Selin Kesebir, Department of OrganizationalBehaviour, London Business School; X Peter G. Klein, HankamerSchool of Business, Baylor University; X Sun Young Lee, School ofManagement, University College London; Hakan Ozcelik, College ofBusiness Administration, California State University, Sacramento;X Jennifer Louise Petriglieri, INSEAD; Nancy P. Rothbard, TheWharton School, University of Pennsylvania; X Cort W. Rudolph,Department of Psychology, Saint Louis University; Jason D. Shaw,Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technology University; X NinaSirola, Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore ManagementUniversity; Connie R. Wanberg, Department of Work and Organiza-tions, University of Minnesota; Ashley Whillans, Harvard BusinessSchool, Harvard University;X Michael P. Wilmot, Sam M. WaltonCollege of Business, University of Arkansas; Mark van Vugt, Depart-ment of Organizational Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
continued
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
American Psychologist© 2020 American Psychological Association 2020, Vol. 2, No. 999, 000ISSN: 0003-066X http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
1
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2720-1593https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2720-1593https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4697-7293https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8811-5117https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9838-7447https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1489-1847https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0344-8199https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3135-3381https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9243-3724https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4615-6532https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8302-538Xhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3909-9445https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5965-3215https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1088-3727https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1078-2205https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0536-9638https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8521-5216https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8521-5216https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3062-7651http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
-
Selin KesebirLondon Business School
Peter G. KleinBaylor University
Sun Young LeeUniversity College London
Hakan OzcelikCalifornia State University, Sacramento
Jennifer Louise PetriglieriINSEAD
Nancy P. RothbardUniversity of Pennsylvania
Cort W. RudolphSaint Louis University
Jason D. ShawNanyang Technology University
Nina SirolaSingapore Management University
Connie R. WanbergUniversity of Minnesota
Ashley WhillansHarvard University
Michael P. WilmotUniversity of Arkansas
Mark van VugtVrije Universiteit Amsterdam
The impacts of COVID-19 on workers and workplaces across the globe have been dramatic.This broad review of prior research rooted in work and organizational psychology, and relatedfields, is intended to make sense of the implications for employees, teams, and workorganizations. This review and preview of relevant literatures focuses on (a) emergentchanges in work practices (e.g., working from home, virtual teamwork) and (b) emergentchanges for workers (e.g., social distancing, stress, and unemployment). In addition, potentialmoderating factors (demographic characteristics, individual differences, and organizationalnorms) are examined given the likelihood that COVID-19 will generate disparate effects. Thisbroad-scope overview provides an integrative approach for considering the implications ofCOVID-19 for work, workers, and organizations while also identifying issues for futureresearch and insights to inform solutions.
Public Significance StatementCOVID-19 has disrupted work and organizations across the globe. This overview integrates andapplies prior research in work and organizational psychology as well as related fields in itsexamination of emergent changes for work practices as well as workers. This article also acknowl-edges and considers the disproportionate impacts that COVID-19 may have on workers depending ondemographic characteristics, individual differences, and relevant organizational norms. In addition tohelping make sense of the implications of COVID-19 for employees, teams, and work organizations,this review features roadmaps for future research and action.
Keywords: COVID-19, employees, work, work from home (WFH), pandemics
Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716.supp
Kevin M. Kniffin, Jayanth Narayanan, and Mark van Vugt served asleads for conceptualization, writing – original draft, and writing – reviewand editing, with support from each additional coauthor (listed alphabeti-cally by last name) through multiple rounds of input, editing, and review.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kevin M.Kniffin, Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, S. C.Johnson College of Business, Cornell University, Warren Hall 111, Ithaca,NY 14853. E-mail: [email protected]
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
2 KNIFFIN ET AL.
mailto:[email protected]
-
COVID-19 is both a global health crisis and an interna-tional economic threat. The business and industry shut-downs that were implemented and mandated across theworld to curb the spread of the virus have generated a widearray of unique challenges for employees and employers. Atthe individual level, populations of shutdown-affected em-ployees were turned overnight into (a) “work from home”(WFH) employees, (b) “essential” or “life-sustaining”workers (e.g., emergency room medical personnel and su-permarket staff), or (c) furloughed or laid-off employeesseeking the nation-specific equivalent of unemploymentbenefits. Organizationally, the economic shutdowns andpolicy changes are likely to (a) change some industriesfundamentally, (b) accelerate trends that were already un-derway in others, and (c) open opportunities for novelindustries to emerge, as typically happens in times of warsand natural disasters (e.g., Sine & David, 2003). Given theuncertainty and breadth of the COVID-19 shock, work andorganizational psychologists urgently need to apply thefield’s current knowledge for the purpose of sensemaking tohelp individuals and organizations manage risks while si-multaneously developing and applying solutions.
Although it is possible that an effective vaccine or ther-apeutic treatment becomes available quickly enough to limitthe direct impacts of COVID-19 to less than a year, a lookat human history is filled with cases where pathogenicmicrobes have wreaked long-lasting havoc on societies andworkplaces (Diamond, 1998). As an example, between1918 and 1920, a variant of the flu killed an estimated 50million people worldwide, many of them adults between theages of 20 and 50 years. In response, many countries ad-opted policies to improve health and working conditions byproviding either universal health care (Europe) or employer-based insurance schemes (United States). More generally,the financial and health impacts of infectious disease havebeen linked to tighter cultural norms and practices (Gelfand,2019), political conservatism and xenophobia (Ji, Tybur, &Van Vugt, 2019), and more directive workplace leadership(Van Vugt, Hogan, & Kaiser, 2008). It is also known, whenconsidering other recent systemic shocks such as the Sep-tember 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, that suchshocks can produce long-lasting global changes in practicesand attitudes toward surveillance, security, and privacy.
This article focuses on the relevance of COVID-19-related risks and changes for workers, workplaces, and workpractices. This broad survey of topics allows us to identifya variety of economic, social-psychological, and health-related risks that workers appear likely to face as either adirect result of COVID-19 or indirectly as a result of eco-nomic shutdowns associated with COVID-19 (given thatresearch on prior economic contractions suggests poten-tially adverse—and lethal—health effects; e.g., Popovici &French, 2013). By focusing on topics that appeared mostlikely to be influenced by COVID-19 during early stages of
the pandemic, we organized ourselves (as described in theonline supplemental materials) to present a review of rele-vant literatures along with an evidence-based preview ofchanges that we expect in the wake of COVID-19 for bothresearch and practice. To organize our consideration of themultiple ways in which the current pandemic is impact-ing the workplace, this review consists of three mainsections (each with three main topical areas): (a) emer-gent changes in work practices (WFH; virtual teamwork;virtual leadership and management), (b) emergentchanges for workers (social distancing and loneliness;health and well-being; unemployment and inequality),and (c) the importance of moderating factors (demo-graphic characteristics; individual differences; organiza-tional norms).
Beyond reviewing and applying prior research to helpmake sense of the crisis, this article aims to provide agenerative overview to help situate and guide future re-search and theorizing on the impacts associated withCOVID-19. In addition, this effort is designed to helpresearchers and practitioners take steps to manage and mit-igate the negative effects of COVID-19 with evidence-based roadmaps for moving forward. Given the wide-ranging impact of COVID-19, this article’s focus on workand organizational psychology is intended to be broad andinclusive; however, there are inevitably additional “work-place” topics that may have inadvertently been omitted.
Emergent Changes in Work Practices
At the same time that COVID-19 abruptly upended nor-mal work routines, it also caused an acceleration of trendsthat were already underway involving the migration of workto online or virtual environments. A key difference, though,is that WFH was previously often responsive to employeepreferences but COVID-19 forced many into MandatoryWork From Home (MWFH), making it difficult to gener-alize prior findings.
Work From Home (WFH)
A Gartner (2020) survey of 229 human resources (HR)departments showed that approximately one half of thecompanies had more than 80% of their employees workingfrom home during early stages of the COVID-19 pandem-ic—and estimated substantial long-term increases for re-mote work after the pandemic. The need for millions ofworkers to WFH in response to COVID-19 has acceleratedrecent remote work trends facilitated by the rise of connec-tivity and communication technologies. While “remotework” is a broader category because it can include “workfrom anywhere” (i.e., not necessarily home), it is knownthat some—such as professionals who need to performcomplex tasks that require little interaction with peers—
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
3COVID-19 AND THE WORKPLACE
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716.supp
-
actually prefer and are more productive if they WFH (Allen,Cho, & Meier, 2014). Yet as large numbers of workers areforced to WFH, many face challenges due to such funda-mental issues as not having space in one’s home to attend towork. For example, employees who live with others alsoface a larger set of challenges than those who live alonebecause they need to navigate others’ space as well (seelater section on Moderating Factors).
Employees often find it challenging to maintain bound-aries between work and nonwork (Ramarajan & Reid,2013). The forced confinement of workers during theCOVID-19 pandemic has further complicated this issue.While WFH might sound appealing if it offers a safe harbor,the absence of separation between one’s work and home—and the lack of commutes to provide a transition betweenthe two domains—can become a burden too. Questions thatwould benefit from closer study include how do individuals’experiences in the work and nonwork domains influenceeach other, and how do individuals’ work and nonworkidentities interact, when they unfold at home?
Given the likelihood that COVID-19 will acceleratetrends toward WFH past the immediate impacts of thepandemic (Gartner, 2020), it is clear that the diversity ofwork arrangements will need to be studied. Future researchshould examine whether and how the COVID-19 quaran-tines that required millions to WFH affected work produc-tivity, creativity, and innovation. Given that quarantine pe-riods have entailed literal windows into the homes ofcoworkers as well as subordinates and superiors, research isalso needed to examine the implications of WFH for topicssuch as motivation and authenticity at work, particularlywhen it becomes normal again to work in colocated work-place settings.
Independent from challenges that individuals can facewhen WFH, it is also notable that (a) the reluctance of manyemployers to adopt WFH before COVID-19 stemmed froma perceived lack of control that employers would have overemployees who were out of sight and reach and (b) there isample reason to expect that new modes of surveillance willaccompany various WFH arrangements. Indeed, even be-fore COVID-19, employers were adopting and developingtechnologies to monitor employees’ whereabouts (e.g., withsociometric sensors; Bhave, Teo, & Dalal, 2020). Althoughmanaging-by-walking-around is not feasible when peopleare working remotely, the rapidly expanded usage of vid-eoconferencing has allowed for virtual sight lines. Yet thesevirtual sight lines are fraught with a risk as they increaseperceived stress and invade privacy. There is also evidencethat such remote and automated monitoring can lead tothe centralization of decision-making and (in the absence ofcountervailing action) contribute to lower creativity amongemployees working in lower organizational levels (Nell,Foss, Klein, & Schmitt, 2020).
Virtual Teamwork
As Mak and Kozlowski (2019) observed before the pan-demic, “Virtual teams . . . are growing in number andimportance (p. 471).” Rather than assume uniformity invirtual team characteristics, though, it is valuable to recog-nize that “team virtuality” is a multifacted concept andencompasses multiple dimensions including the geographi-cal distribution of team members and the relative amountsof (a)synchronous e-communication (Hoch & Kozlowski,2014). Indeed, a nuanced conceptualizing of virtuality—as acontinuous variable, given that teams are not simply eitherface-to-face or virtual—has already been developed (Mak& Kozlowski, 2019) and should prove helpful for futureresearchers who work to classify the different forms ofvirtual teamwork that have emerged.
Prior research shows that virtual teamwork tends to lackthe communication richness available to face-to-face teams(Martins, Gilson, & Maynard, 2004) and that traditionalteamwork problems such as conflict and coordination canescalate quickly (Mortensen & Hinds, 2001). Buildingstructural scaffolds to mitigate conflicts, align teams, andensure safe and thorough information processing are keyrecommendations for virtual teams. For example, priorwork has shown the need—especially in virtual teams—toformalize team processes, clarify team goals, and build-instructural solutions to foster psychologically safe discus-sions (e.g., Gibson & Gibbs, 2006).
Increased team virtuality as a result of COVID-19 mayalso affect helping and pro-social behavior. While physicaldistancing among coworkers may reduce helping behaviorsin the near term, prior research has shown that peopleshould be bolder to request help from others because peopledo tend to be more willing to help, and give better qualityhelp, than is usually assumed (Newark, Bohns, & Flynn,2017), perhaps especially during crises. Normal impedi-ments to requesting help center on the feeling that it can beuncomfortable, awkward, and embarrassing (e.g., Bohns &Flynn, 2010), but “best practices” in virtual helping canassist help-seekers in overcoming these psychological bar-riers by maintaining personal privacy (Cleavenger & Mun-yon, 2015), reducing stigmatization (Ben-Porath, 2002), andinstilling hope that things will get better once help is re-ceived (McDermott et al., 2017).
As COVID-19 has accelerated the expansion of virtualteams, it will be valuable for researchers to track andstudy innovations that may enable such teams to functionoptimally. For example, the intersection of remote workwith a global crisis brings up questions of how emotions,such as anxiety and stress, can best be communicated andregulated in the unique setting of virtually connectedwork where social and emotional cues are relativelylimited (for an overview, see Lindebaum, Geddes, &Jordan, 2018). On the other hand, there are prior studies
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
4 KNIFFIN ET AL.
-
showing that teams operating online tend to be moreeffective at brainstorming than face-to-face teams (e.g.,DeRosa, Smith, & Hantula, 2007). In contrast, researchfocused on individual performance has shown that re-motely interacting teammates appear to miss the creativebenefits that can flow from frequent face-to-face interac-tions (Allen, Golden, & Shockley, 2015). The rapidgrowth in virtual teams offers an opportunity to examinenew questions as well as develop interventions to helpimprove teamwork in virtual settings; and, in that pursuit,close attention needs to be paid to the multidimensionalways in which virtuality varies among remote teams(Mak & Kozlowski, 2019). The burgeoning area of re-search on teamwork in health care settings (e.g., Salas,Reyes, & McDaniel, 2018) where doctors and nurses inemergency rooms have long been working with eachother behind masks offers a valuable model for teamworkthat is not directly face to face.
Virtual Leadership and Management
The role of leaders to determine organizational outcomesthat have a broad impact on employees at all levels isespecially clear in the crucible of a crisis and certainly vitalin fundamental ways. With the COVID-19 crisis requiringmillions of employees across different hierarchical levels toWFH, it is reassuring to know that leadership can also workeffectively from a distance (Antonakis & Atwater, 2002).Prior research shows that successful leaders are thoseskilled in a domain to make the right decisions and providereassurance through a balanced mix of optimism and real-ism regarding the future. In other words, effective leadersstrive (in any time period) to project vision—a symbolicstate of affairs with which the collective identifies—and toreify it (Antonakis, Bastardoz, Jacquart, & Shamir, 2016).Another possibility, which future research should examine,is that the move to high-virtuality work arrangements willfoster more participatory relationships given that physicalcues of dominance (e.g., size) are less salient in virtualenvironments.
Research on the effectiveness of leaders during and afterthe COVID-19 crisis should examine an array of activities,including the degree to which remote leaders are persuasiveif they (a) clearly state their values that will guide institu-tional actions, (b) understand and openly discuss the travailsand hopes of their collectives, (c) clearly communicate anambitious vision of the direction that the unit will headtoward, and (d) demonstrate confidence that strategic goalscan be achieved. These skills are referred to as charisma(Antonakis et al., 2016) and require domain expertise aswell as training and investment. Indeed, crises can bringabout changes in leadership styles (Stoker, Garretsen, &Soudis, 2019); thus, firms can expect to be better preparedby ensuring that they have adequately invested in profes-
sional development. Future research should estimate if andhow organizational commitments to employees’ profes-sional development during the crisis pay later dividends. Ata more basic level, it will be important to assess howCOVID-19-induced changes in training programs (i.e.,moving online) will affect the accessibility, efficiency, andefficacy of such programs (Cascio, 2019; Salas, Tannen-baum, Kraiger, & Smith-Jentsch, 2012).
Among the more specific leader-subordinate activitiesthat will be important to consider in relation to COVID-19is how assessment and appraisal systems will function. Forexample, without being able to directly monitor subordi-nates in the way that office settings allow, there may be ashift to results-focused assessment, which prior researchshows to be generally effective (Pritchard, Harrell, Di-azGranados, & Guzman, 2008). Over longer spans of time,though, working remotely may reduce the opportunities forsubordinates to gain feedback from leaders and prior re-search suggests that a lack of learning opportunities isassociated with lower organizational commitment andhigher risk of turnover (Vandenberghe et al., 2019). Inaddition, future research should examine how trust can bebuilt remotely with online interactions so that newcomersare not disadvantaged due to the lack of face-to-face inter-actions with their supervisors (Dunbar, 2018).
Emergent Changes for Workers
In addition to the immediate impact of COVID-19, thereis also likely to be a diverse range of social-psychological,health-related and economic costs of the pandemic for in-dividuals, including for those (a) whose work was madevirtual or remote, (b) who continued as “essential” workers,and (c) who were laid off either temporarily or permanently.While the previous section on work practices focused onthose whose work was made virtual, this section as well asthe rest of this article have broad relevance for everyoneaffected by COVID-19, including essential workers andthose who have been laid off.
Social Distancing and Loneliness
The loss of social connections—for those who were laidoff and those required to WFH is likely to negatively impactworkers. Prior research has shown that high-quality socialinteractions—including informal chats among coworkers—are essential for mental and physical health (Mogilner,Whillans, & Norton, 2018). Handshakes that are also knownto be valuable for social connection (e.g., Schroeder, Risen,Gino, & Norton, 2019) are now restricted. Against thisbackdrop, both the requirement to WFH and plans to de-densify workplaces in support of physical distancing arelikely to have side effects that include at least some degreeof harm to individuals’ mental and physical health (Brookset al., 2020).
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
5COVID-19 AND THE WORKPLACE
-
More insidious than the loss of social connections, lone-liness is a psychologically painful emotion that results frompeople’s subjective feelings that their intimate and socialneeds are not adequately met (Cacioppo et al., 2006) andwas already considered “an epidemic” (Murthy, 2017) priorto this pandemic. Workplace loneliness has been shown tohave strong negative relationships to employees’ affectivecommitment, affiliative behaviors, and performance (Ozce-lik & Barsade, 2018). While we noted that virtual commu-nications lack richness, a more negative risk of communi-cations going online is that misunderstandings—in theabsence of nonverbal cues—are likely to increase employ-ees’ concerns about being interpersonally rejected, contrib-uting to loneliness (Cacioppo et al., 2006).
As organizations look ahead, prior research recommendsthat workplace loneliness be acknowledged and addressedas an indicator of employee well-being in HR policies,programs, and practices. Close study of innovations thatpeople started initiating within weeks of mandatory shut-downs (e.g., virtual lunch meetings) would also be valuablefor informing future practice as well as research intended tohelp prevent loneliness and increase resilience. Such inves-tigations would complement recent work focused on devel-oping resilience through experimentally tested interventions(Williams, Parks, Cormier, Stafford, & Whillans, 2018).
Health and Well-Being
Given the uncertainties of the pandemic, organizationsneed to actively support the health and well-being of em-ployees. Building on job demands–resources theory (Bak-ker & Demerouti, 2017), it is notable there is variationacross and within industries with respect to how COVID-19has affected both the demands and resources of differentjobs. There is evidence suggesting that working conditionshave deteriorated for many employees. In light of suchstrains, COVID-19 has contributed to greater risk of em-ployees encountering job burnout—a chronic stress syn-drome, including permanent feelings of exhaustion and adistant attitude toward work (Demerouti, Mostert, & Bak-ker, 2010). Moreover, the continuous exposure toCOVID-19 media news fosters rumination—repetitivelyand passively focusing on symptoms of distress and on thepossible causes and consequences of these symptoms(Nolen-Hoeksema, Wisco, & Lyubomirsky, 2008). Paststudies have shown that people who were exposed to Hur-ricane Katrina had above-baseline stress and depressionsymptoms a year after the event (Obradovich, Migliorini,Paulus, & Rahwan, 2018), indicating that mental healthproblems may remain long after a crisis.
To adequately deal with pandemic-specific and generi-cally uncertain job demands, employees will need re-sources. To help address this, organizations may use top–down (or may facilitate bottom–up) interventions to take
care of employee health and well-being with a goal torestore balance between job demands and resources. As astarting point, organizations and their leaders should con-sider providing (a) immediate tangible resources, such asinformation (e.g., about working from home, prevention oftransmission), employee assistance programs, or access tocounseling, therapy, and training, and (b) psychologicalresources such as feedback, support, and inspiration throughregular contact with their employees using video calls.Research that tracks and identifies which variants of suchefforts are most effective will yield benefits beyond thesystemic shocks of COVID-19. In addition, future researchshould determine whether structural efforts to optimizeworking conditions via job redesign and job crafting can beas effective now as compared to pre-COVID-19 (Oprea,Barzin, Vîrgă, Iliescu, & Rusu, 2019).
More immediate than many forms of stress, COVID-19draws close attention to the problem of presenteeism (i.e.,people going to work when ill; Johns, 2010). From priorresearch, there is ample evidence that sick people do persistin going to work, especially in parts of the United Stateswhere paid sick leave is not presently mandated (e.g.,Pichler & Ziebarth, 2017) and especially among those whoare highly engaged with their work and/or perceive veryhigh job demands (Miraglia & Johns, 2016). Independent ofpolicies regarding presenteeism, Dietz, Zacher, Scheel,Otto, and Rigotti (2020) found that work team membersimitate the level of presenteeism exhibited by their super-visors. Compensation policies should also be reviewed inthis context to help ensure that there are not incentives forcoworkers to pressure each other to attend to work whilesick (Kessler, 2017). Notably, for people with jobs that canbe done remotely, research should examine how sickness isnavigated in the post-COVID-19 workscape (e.g., to see ifsick days or snow/weather days will be expected to be WFHdays). Further, for employers that do take active steps tomitigate and guard against presenteeism, it will be impor-tant to monitor and assess the degree to which employeeprivacy rights are maintained as organizations assume theright to daily health checks.
As with stress and presenteeism, employee addiction-riskis another aspect of health and well-being that needs atten-tion. While it is well known that traumatic events canprecipitate societal shifts in addictive behaviors such asalcohol consumption (Vlahov et al., 2002), the COVID-19pandemic is particularly concerning because massive unem-ployment and mandatory WFH orders may heighten vulner-abilities and thus trigger or exacerbate alcohol use disorders(i.e., alcohol abuse or dependence) – a diagnosis applicableto nearly 13% of Americans and 20% of Europeans (Grantet al., 2017). Prior research has shown that workforce dis-engagement can be associated with a decrease in alcoholmisuse due to distancing from workplace-based norms todrink (Bamberger & Bacharach, 2014). There is also evi-
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
6 KNIFFIN ET AL.
-
dence, though, that proximity to work-based peers andsupervisors (which is largely absent when employees WFH)can provide essential stress-attenuating support in times ofcrisis that can prevent alcohol-based coping (Bacharach,Bamberger, & Sonnenstuhl, 2002).
Beyond traditional employee assistance programs, peer as-sistance programs including union-sponsored (e.g., Associa-tion of Flight Attendants’ member assistance program), jointlabor-management-sponsored (e.g., United Auto Workers-Ford Employee Support Services Program), and employee-initiated (e.g., Google’s Blue Dot) programs have shown par-ticular efficacy in times of crisis (Golan, Bacharach, &Bamberger, 2010), not only for those actively employed, butfor those disengaged from work as well (Bamberger & Bacha-rach, 2014). Practitioners can also consider Internet-based briefinterventions incorporating personalized norm-feedback (dem-onstrating, e.g., that the individual’s drinking behavior is ex-cessive relative to his or her cohort) and/or textual or video-based insights for addressing the kinds of negative emotionalstates potentially driving alcohol-based self-medication be-cause both kinds of approaches have also demonstrated effi-cacy (Brendryen, Johansen, Duckert, & Nesvåg, 2017). Asface-to-face support becomes scarce, personalized and adap-tive virtual technologies may well offer an important newmeans to assist workers.
Unemployment and Inequality
As entire industries such as travel, hospitality, sports, andentertainment were shut down by COVID-19, millions ofpeople in the United States alone filed new unemploymentclaims in early 2020. In addition to losing income, individ-uals who are unemployed may experience a range of stress-related consequences including depression, anxiety, andphysical ailments (Wanberg, 2012). Jahoda’s (1982) latentdeprivation model helps explain the negative effects ofunemployment on psychological well-being by acknowl-edging that employment provides both manifest (e.g., in-come) and latent (e.g., time structure, social contact, sharingof common goals, status, and activity) benefits. Financialdeprivation can be particularly devastating, triggering aspiral of adversity that can affect the entire family (McKee-Ryan & Maitoza, 2018).
Hopes related to COVID-19 unemployment have cen-tered on an economic recovery unfolding fast enough thatjobs lost to COVID-19 unemployment will largely be re-gained but that is far from certain. The broad-based closuresassociated with COVID-19 have further complicated typicaladvice for individuals who are unemployed to develop aregular routine of job search (Wanberg, Ali, & Csillag,2020). Researchers studying unique features of COVID-19will want to compare how people cope and adapt to theshocks entailed by COVID-19 in both the near-term withrespect to the employer that let them go and, in the longer
term, where career adaptability (Klehe, Zikic, van Vianen,Koen, & Buyken, 2012)—the willingness and interest toexplore new options and future work scenarios—mightprove to be increasingly valuable.
In addition to the consequences of unemployment forindividuals, there are negative spillover effects for thosewho remain employed. Prior research shows that whenfirms reduce overall staffing levels, there tends to be cor-respondingly lower levels of organizational commitment,job involvement, and greater stress among survivors(Trevor & Nyberg, 2008). Meta-analytic evidence finds thatoverall reduction in staffing has roughly the same adverseorganizational performance as comparable voluntary turn-over (e.g., Park & Shaw, 2013). Recent research has alsoshown that broader economic downturns tend to be associ-ated with a shift toward more “zero-sum” mindsets with adownstream consequence that people become increasinglyprone to misconstrue others as competitors even when theyare not (Sirola & Pitesa, 2017). Future research that exam-ines the mass layoffs entailed by COVID-19 should test theextent to which prior research holds up in the face of thewide, broad, and abrupt layoffs.
As a broader cost associated with the pandemic, manyanalysts expect that inequality will increase in the wakeof COVID-19 just as it has in recent shocks such as the2008 financial crisis (Wisman, 2013). Such inequalitiesare known from past shocks to provide differential re-sources and opportunities for individuals to gain employ-ment and promotions while exacerbating inequalities inpay and benefits (Bapuji, Ertug, & Shaw, 2020). Inrelation to COVID-19, it seems likely that there will becontinued growth in short-term jobs given that— evenprior to the pandemic—the so-called gig economy (Ash-ford, Caza, & Reid, 2018) was growing at a high rate(Manyika, 2016) as a new kind of normal (Petriglieri,Ashford, & Wrzesniewski, 2019).
Given prior work showing that organizational andsocietal inequalities feed into each other, there are rea-sons to be concerned that growth in inequality afterCOVID-19 will contribute to a downward spiral of neg-ative trends in the workplace in the form of decreasedwork centrality, and increased burnout, absenteeism, de-viant behaviors, bullying, and turnover (Bapuji et al.,2020). Further, it is likely that job insecurities post-COVID-19 will motivate greater risk-taking and presen-teeism among low-paid workers that, in turn, may in-crease public health risks for further spread of thedisease. Finally, societies may be confronted with socialunrest and political upheaval (e.g., demonstrations, riots)as social and economic inequality increases on the backof COVID-19. Therefore, greater organizational invest-ments to minimize inequality should dampen the negativespiraling that is otherwise likely to unfold.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
7COVID-19 AND THE WORKPLACE
-
Moderating Factors
The changes and impacts reviewed in the previous twosections will disparately impact (and be impacted by) em-ployees with certain demographic characteristics, individualdifferences, and variable organizational norms. While thefollowing subsections focus on moderators for which thereexists evidence relevant to COVID-19, there are amplereasons to expect that these interact with additional factorssuch as a person’s socioeconomic or their health status (i.e.,chronic illnesses). These moderators are key concerns iforganizations are going to maintain pre-COVID-19 com-mitments to diverse, inclusive, and equitable workplaces.
Demographic Characteristics
Preliminary analyses of COVID-19 indicate that olderpeople are disproportionately at-risk of dying if they areinfected thereby warranting substantial attention to agingworkers. Declining birthrates and increasing life expectancyin the past century have led to an aging workforce across theglobe (Rudolph, Marcus, & Zacher, 2018). Given the healthrisks faced by older employees as well as early retirementincentives that organizations dealing with budget shortfallsare expected to offer, it is possible that the post-COVIDworkplace is less diverse with respect to age. Older employ-ees’ decisions in relation to COVID-19 seem likely to beinfluenced partly by the status of their retirement savings orbenefits; and, certainly, there will continue to be moreheterogeneity in countries where there is not a mandatoryretirement age (e.g., Van Solinge & Henkens, 2014).
Similar to age, fatality rates for contracting COVID-19have also varied substantially by race (e.g., within theUnited States) with speculation that the racial differencesreflect underlying differences in preexisting health condi-tions, lower socioeconomic status, and dense living condi-tions. Additionally, members of racial and ethnic minoritygroups are less likely to be able to work remotely and as aresult face greater exposure to the virus. In the UnitedKingdom, health care professionals from Black, Asian, andminority ethnic groups represent 20% of nurses and mid-wives and 44% of doctors and dentists (Cook, Kursumovic,& Lennane, 2020); however, 70% of health care profession-als who have died from the virus come from these samegroups with similar patterns visible in the United States(Cookson & Milne, 2020). Although much is known aboutbias and discrimination in the workplace, less is knownabout how to mitigate them. To date, organizational schol-ars and psychologists have proposed individual-level copingstrategies (Smith, Watkins, Ladge, & Carlton, 2019), inter-personal identity management strategies (Creary, Caza, &Roberts, 2015), and organizational-level interventions suchas diversity training (Nkomo & Hoobler, 2014) that canimprove racial and ethnic minorities’ experiences at work.Missing from the literature is an understanding of whether
these strategies are similarly effective under conditions ofeconomic threat when racial and ethnic minorities are par-ticularly vulnerable to layoffs (Elvira & Zatzick, 2002). Notonly should scholars who are legally able to collect racialand ethnic data continue to do so during and beyond thispandemic, organizational and managerial interventionsaimed at improving the workplace conditions and experi-ences of racial and ethnic minorities including their expe-riences of inclusion (Roberts, Mayo, & Thomas, 2019) andbelonging (Good, Rattan, & Dweck, 2012) will be valuable.
As with age as well as race and ethnicity, COVID-19likely affects gender in a variety of ways. Higher fatalityrates for men imply that male workers might need greaterphysical protection from the virus; however, there are eco-nomic and psychological reasons to suspect that womenface greater occupational risks. First, women tend to workin positions that are more directly affected by COVID-19and more easily replaceable (e.g., hospitality, cleaning, anddomestic work; Alon, Doepke, Olmstead-Rumsey, & Ter-tilt, 2020). Second, because women tend to have higherempathy (Bloise & Johnson, 2007), women tend to experi-ence more distress from stressful life events, particularly theones affecting others (Kessler & McLeod, 1984). Globally,several female leaders (e.g., Angela Merkel, Tsai Ing-wen)have tackled COVID-19 effectively. Whereas this contrastswith prior research indicating that people prefer a masculineleader in times of crisis (e.g., Van Vugt et al., 2008), a setof feminine values and traits can also be effective in crisismanagement, including: a communal orientation in moraldecision-making (Tinghög et al., 2016); higher sensitivity torisk (Eckel & Grossman, 2008), particularly about healthissues (Flynn, Slovic, & Mertz, 1994); higher conscien-tiousness (Schmitt, Realo, Voracek, & Allik, 2008); and,more attentive communication styles (Campbell, 2013).Combining these insights, it is plausible that a femininestyle of leadership might become recognized as optimal fordealing with crises in the future.
Finally, individual family status (e.g., living alone; withothers; with young children) appears likely to disparatelyaffect how COVID-19 impacts individuals’ life and work.For example, research has shown that, in heterosexual cou-ples, women typically do the majority of household work,and this can lead them to opt-out of careers (Stone, 2008).Given that partners are known to play a key role in sup-porting (or undermining) each other’s careers and develop-ing professional identities (Petriglieri & Obodaru, 2019), itwill also be key to understand how couples manage theemotional labor of dealing with anxiety provoked by thepandemic. Among interventions specific to families thatresearchers will want to want to understand more closely arethe conditions and ways in which revisiting psychologicalcontracts among couples—perhaps especially among cou-ples with (young) children—is beneficial (Petriglieri, 2019).
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
8 KNIFFIN ET AL.
-
Individual Differences
The Big Five personality traits predict many work atti-tudes and behaviors, including those relevant to COVID-19,such as coping (Connor-Smith & Flachsbart, 2007), work-life balance (Michel, Kotrba, Mitchelson, Clark, & Baltes,2011), and subjective well-being (Anglim, Horwood, Smil-lie, Marrero, & Wood, 2020). Second-order quantitativereviews of more than 90 meta-analyses show that extraver-sion and conscientiousness play particularly important rolesin successful adjustment. Extraversion contributes to adjust-ment by promoting more frequent experiences of higherlevels of positive emotion as well as a richer repertoire ofinterpersonal skill (Wilmot, Wanberg, Kammeyer-Mueller,& Ones, 2019), whereas conscientiousness contributes toadjustment by fostering commitment and perseverance to-ward more predictable, nonimmediate work goals (Wilmot& Ones, 2019).
In light of this prior research, there are reasons to expectthat both traits play key but distinct roles in workplaceadjustments to the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, theneed for distancing among people may heighten tendenciestoward Introversion, which, in turn, have been associatedwith diminished positive emotions (Margolis & Lyubomir-sky, 2020). Furthermore, while conscientiousness offerspotent workplace benefits, we know that unpredictabilityincreases job complexity, which, in turn, decreases consci-entiousness’ beneficial effects (Wilmot & Ones, 2019). Ac-cordingly, organizational interventions that facilitate socialengagement in spite of physical distancing and bring roleclarity as well as specific goals may offer much-neededpredictability in an uncertain time.
Beyond the Big Five traits, other individual differencesmay also matter. For example, regarding WFH, Rothbard,Phillips, and Dumas (2005) reported that “segmentors” tendto enjoy work and perform better when they have a clearboundary between work and nonwork, whereas “integra-tors” tend to flourish when toggling between different ac-tivities across these boundaries. This distinction is usefulbecause each may benefit from different adaptations in theirwork routines. Segmentors, particularly those who live withothers, may benefit from strategies that enable them totolerate nonwork interruptions during work hours, whereasintegrators may benefit from some segmentation in time andspace.
Organizational Norms
While cultural variation around the globe can be classi-fied on numerous dimensions, the dimension of culturaltightness–looseness, which is comparable to classifyingcultures as relatively collectivist or individualist (Hofstede,1984), appears most relevant for making sense ofCOVID-19 because it explains how human groups developstrong norms and tighter organizational cultures in reaction
to life threatening-experiences (Harrington & Gelfand,2014). More specifically, prior research suggests that cul-tural tightening—with advantages that include greater socialorder, efficiency, and directive leadership—becomes moreadaptive during a crisis, but is perhaps more maladaptive asrecovery becomes timely and looseness and its associatedcreativity are needed. Historically, nations with more infec-tious disease threats are culturally tighter and, as a result,less innovative (Gelfand, 2019).
In anticipation of eventual recoveries from the COVID-19shutdowns, organizations will need to find the right balancebetween an overly tight or loose culture, known as tight–loose ambidexterity (Gelfand, 2019). Accordingly, as manyworkplaces tighten in response to their shaky economicstanding, successful organizations will benefit from havingflexible tightness—rules that bind employees together toprevent social isolation and loneliness, accompanied by theright dose of looseness, which affords employees lati-tude and autonomy where possible. It is clear that as theeffective tightness or looseness of a given organization’sculture changes as it deals with COVID-19, there will beassociated changes in the ways that employees navigateother dimensions that were examined in previous sections.For example, in culturally tight organizations (e.g., hospi-tals, airlines), team creativity and innovation may be fos-tered by allowing teams to interact virtually, whereas cul-turally looser organizations (e.g., universities) might profitfrom a greater concern with health and safety regulations, asa result of COVID-19.
Among other dimensions of cultural difference that arevaluable to consider in relation to COVID-19, it is notablethat just as research shows that infectious diseases can helpcultivate political conservatism and xenophobia (Ji et al.,2019), it is logical to anticipate that sociocultural differ-ences (e.g., in collectivism) help explain how people andorganizations responded to COVID-19. While analysis ofthese kinds of cultural difference are outside of this article’sscope, future research should consider how employees’ andorganizations’ responses to COVID-19 might have beeninfluenced by their values, political affiliations, and/or othertraits.
Discussion and Conclusion
For this project, we organized ourselves as a large anddiverse virtual team of researchers to make sense ofCOVID-19 for questions of relevance to work and organi-zational psychology. As is known from prior research onteamwork among scientists (Kniffin & Hanks, 2018), thebenefits of this approach—because many hands make lightwork and many heads are better than a few—are obvious,especially as we are dealing with an urgent phenomenon,COVID-19, of seismic proportions. Nevertheless, it is alsocertain that this overview is limited and we may have
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
9COVID-19 AND THE WORKPLACE
-
Tab
le1
Sum
mar
yof
Impl
icat
ions
,Is
sues
for
Fut
ure
Res
earc
h,an
dIn
sigh
tsfo
rA
ctio
nR
egar
ding
CO
VID
-19
and
the
Wor
kpla
ce
Dom
ain
ofw
ork
Impl
icat
ions
Issu
esfo
rfu
ture
rese
arch
Insi
ght-
driv
enac
tions
Em
erge
ntch
ange
sin
wor
kpr
actic
esW
ork
from
hom
e(W
FH)
The
mas
sive
,ab
rupt
,an
dm
anda
tory
(for
man
yem
ploy
ees)
switc
hto
WFH
has
requ
ired
empl
oyee
sto
adap
tw
hile
empl
oyer
sha
vebe
com
em
ore
open
toad
optin
gth
epr
actic
epo
stpa
ndem
ic.
How
will
WFH
polic
ies
affe
ctem
ploy
eeat
titud
esan
dbe
havi
ors
toth
eir
empl
oyer
sas
wel
las
thei
rco
wor
kers
?
Em
ploy
ees
shou
ldcr
eate
ritu
als
that
allo
wtr
ansi
tions
(in
the
abse
nce
ofco
mm
utin
g)in
orde
rto
man
age
the
boun
dari
esbe
twee
nw
ork
and
hom
e.H
oww
illem
ploy
eeat
titud
esto
priv
acy
and
mon
itori
ngsh
ift
for
wor
kth
atis
done
outs
ide
ofan
offi
cese
tting
?
Org
aniz
atio
nssh
ould
adop
tan
den
cour
age
rout
ines
that
enha
nce
trus
tw
hile
bein
gat
tent
ive
toth
eco
sts
ofin
crea
sed
mon
itori
ng.
Vir
tual
team
wor
kE
mpl
oyee
sw
hoar
efo
rced
tow
ork
virt
ually
for
team
proj
ects
have
need
edto
navi
gate
the
indi
rect
and
dire
ctco
nflic
tsth
atca
nre
sult
inpe
rfor
man
celo
sses
.
How
will
emot
ion
expr
essi
onan
dco
mm
unic
atio
nin
team
sw
ithei
ther
low
orhi
ghvi
rtua
lity
affe
ctou
tcom
es?
Tea
mm
embe
rsne
edto
pay
atte
ntio
nto
the
stru
ctur
ean
dna
ture
ofco
mm
unic
atio
nfl
ows
inor
der
tom
anag
eth
emef
fect
ivel
y.W
hat
fact
ors
will
lead
tohe
lpin
gan
dpr
osoc
ial
beha
vior
sin
team
sw
ithei
ther
low
orhi
ghvi
rtua
lity—
and
how
will
thes
eim
pact
outc
omes
?
Org
aniz
atio
nssh
ould
prov
ide
oppo
rtun
ities
for
nont
ask
inte
ract
ions
amon
gem
ploy
ees
toal
low
emot
iona
lco
nnec
tions
and
bond
ing
toco
ntin
ueam
ong
team
mem
bers
.V
irtu
alle
ader
ship
and
man
agem
ent
Lea
ders
are
test
edw
hen
pres
ente
dw
ithsy
stem
icsh
ocks
and
mus
tco
ntin
ueto
proj
ect
visi
on.
Man
ager
sar
efa
ced
with
new
chal
leng
esto
supe
rvis
ean
dcu
ltiva
teth
ede
velo
pmen
tof
thei
rsu
bord
inat
esfr
omm
uch
grea
ter
dist
ance
than
usua
l.
How
will
lead
ers
adap
tth
eir
styl
esin
resp
onse
tosh
ocks
such
asth
ecu
rren
tpa
ndem
ic?
Lea
ders
need
toba
lanc
eop
timis
man
dre
alis
min
thei
rco
mm
unic
atio
nsw
ithem
ploy
ees
whi
lede
mon
stra
ting
skill
ssu
chas
char
ism
a.H
owca
nor
gani
zatio
nscr
eate
supe
rior
lead
erco
mm
unic
atio
nto
allo
wfe
edba
ckan
dm
ento
ring
toha
ppen
effe
ctiv
ely?
Org
aniz
atio
nsne
edto
(con
tinue
to)
inve
stin
the
deve
lopm
ent
ofcu
rren
tan
dpo
tent
ial
lead
ers
tobu
ildne
wsk
ills
tofu
nctio
nef
fect
ivel
yin
new
wor
kse
tting
s.E
mer
gent
chan
ges
for
wor
kers
Soci
aldi
stan
cing
and
lone
lines
sW
FH—
and
the
reor
gani
zatio
nof
wor
kspa
ces
toen
sure
dist
ance
amon
gpe
ople
—is
likel
yto
ham
per
soci
alco
nnec
tions
and,
intu
rn,
nega
tivel
yaf
fect
empl
oyee
men
tal
and
phys
ical
heal
th.
How
can
orga
niza
tions
fost
erhi
gh-
qual
ityso
cial
inte
ract
ions
amon
gco
wor
kers
whe
nW
FHor
wor
king
inde
dens
ifie
dw
orkp
lace
s?
Hum
anre
sour
ces
com
mun
icat
ions
shou
ldac
know
ledg
eth
eri
skof
wor
kpla
celo
nelin
ess
and
the
valu
eof
soci
alco
nnec
tions
aspa
rtof
broa
der
empl
oyee
wel
lnes
spr
ogra
mm
ing.
Wha
tin
nova
tions
are
mos
tef
fect
ive
for
miti
gatin
gan
incr
ease
inlo
nelin
ess?
Org
aniz
atio
nssh
ould
iden
tify
and
impl
emen
tpo
licie
san
din
terv
entio
nsto
supp
ort
soci
alco
nnec
tions
amon
gem
ploy
ees.
Hea
lthan
dw
ell-
bein
gIn
crea
sed
job
dem
ands
and
redu
ced
reso
urce
sar
elik
ely
tole
adto
grea
ter
stre
ssam
ong
empl
oyee
s.A
mon
gpe
ople
serv
ing
“ess
entia
l”jo
bs,
ther
eis
likel
yto
bean
incr
ease
inpe
ople
goin
gto
wor
kw
hen
ill.
Incr
ease
insu
bsta
nce
mis
use
ispo
ssib
ledu
ring
the
pand
emic
and
any
subs
eque
ntec
onom
icdo
wnt
urn.
Doe
sru
min
atio
nab
out
am
ajor
cris
islik
eC
OV
ID-1
9ex
acer
bate
the
stre
ssan
dpr
eclu
deef
fect
ive
use
ofth
eav
aila
ble
job
reso
urce
s?H
owca
nem
ploy
erpa
yan
dbe
nefi
tpl
ans
best
best
ruct
ured
todi
scou
rage
peop
lego
ing
tow
ork
whe
nill
?W
hat
isth
eef
fica
cyof
Inte
rnet
-bas
ed,
brie
fin
terv
entio
nsin
prev
entin
gth
eon
set
and/
orex
acer
batio
nof
alco
hol
mis
use
amon
gem
ploy
ees?
Wha
tis
the
impa
ctof
the
rela
xatio
nof
CO
VID
-19
rest
rict
ions
onal
coho
lm
isus
ean
dad
dict
ions
mor
ege
nera
lly?
Lea
ders
shou
ldbe
trai
ned
tofa
cilit
ate
job
craf
ting
soth
atem
ploy
ees
can
bette
rco
pew
ithne
wan
dun
cert
ain
job
dem
ands
.E
mpl
oyer
ssh
ould
not
ince
ntiv
ize
empl
oyee
sto
wor
kth
roug
hill
ness
.L
eade
rssh
ould
mod
elap
prop
riat
ebe
havi
oran
dno
tat
tend
wor
kw
hen
ill.
With
appr
opri
ate
cons
ent
and
atte
ntio
nto
priv
acy
issu
es,
orga
niza
tions
shou
ldin
vest
inm
achi
nele
arni
ngan
dw
eara
ble
tech
nolo
gies
desi
gned
tovi
rtua
llyan
dra
pidl
yid
entif
yth
eon
set
orex
acer
batio
nof
risk
ybe
havi
ors
such
asal
coho
lm
isus
e.
(tab
leco
ntin
ues)
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
10 KNIFFIN ET AL.
-
Tab
le1
(con
tinu
ed)
Dom
ain
ofw
ork
Impl
icat
ions
Issu
esfo
rfu
ture
rese
arch
Insi
ght-
driv
enac
tions
Une
mpl
oym
ent
and
ineq
ualit
yT
heco
sts
ofun
empl
oym
ent
are
both
econ
omic
and
late
ntdu
eto
the
loss
ofso
cial
stru
ctur
e,st
atus
,an
dso
cial
ties.
The
rear
eal
sodi
rect
and
indi
rect
cost
sex
peri
ence
dby
thos
ew
hore
mai
nw
orki
ngin
orga
niza
tions
that
have
laid
off
wor
kers
.In
crea
ses
inin
equa
lity
expe
cted
from
the
shoc
kof
CO
VID
-19
are
likel
yto
lead
tobu
rnou
t,de
vian
tbe
havi
ors,
and
with
draw
als.
Wha
tis
the
impa
ctof
unem
ploy
men
tbe
yond
men
tal
heal
thou
tcom
esan
dho
wca
nth
eun
empl
oyed
reco
ver?
Wha
thu
man
reso
urce
spr
actic
es,
polic
ies,
prog
ram
s,an
d/or
form
sof
supp
ort
can
alle
viat
eth
ene
gativ
eco
nseq
uenc
esof
mas
sla
yoff
son
thos
ew
hore
mai
nem
ploy
ed?
How
can
orga
niza
tions
best
min
imiz
eth
ein
divi
dual
and
orga
niza
tiona
lco
sts
ofbr
oade
rso
cial
ineq
ualit
y?
Job
sear
chin
gre
quir
esre
silie
nce
and
pers
iste
nce
and
job
seek
ers
shou
ldse
eksu
ppor
tan
din
form
atio
nfr
omot
hers
.Jo
bse
eker
ssh
ould
also
prep
are
for
alo
nger
job
sear
chth
anw
ould
beth
eca
sew
ithlo
wer
unem
ploy
men
tra
tes.
Org
aniz
atio
nsne
edto
redu
cein
equa
litie
s,by
redu
cing
sele
ctio
nbi
ases
infa
vor
ofth
ede
mog
raph
ical
lypr
ivile
ged
and
taki
ngac
tion
topr
even
tfu
rthe
rne
gativ
esp
iral
ing
ofpa
yan
dbe
nefi
ts.
Mod
erat
ing
fact
ors
Dem
ogra
phic
char
acte
rist
ics
Old
erem
ploy
ees
face
disp
arat
ehe
alth
and
econ
omic
risk
sre
late
dto
CO
VID
-19
with
impa
cts
onre
tirem
ent
plan
ning
.M
embe
rsof
raci
alan
det
hnic
min
ority
grou
psfa
cedi
spar
ate
heal
than
dec
onom
icri
sks
rela
ted
toC
OV
ID-1
9.M
enar
em
ore
likel
yto
face
dire
cthe
alth
thre
ats
ofC
OV
ID-1
9.W
omen
are
mor
elik
ely
tobe
affe
cted
byth
ead
vers
eec
onom
ican
dso
cial
cost
s.
How
will
orga
niza
tions
resp
ond
toag
e-sp
ecif
icco
ncer
nsin
volv
ing
the
risk
sas
soci
ated
with
CO
VID
-19?
How
door
gani
zatio
nsfo
ster
incl
usio
nan
da
sens
eof
belo
ngin
gam
ong
raci
alan
det
hnic
min
oriti
esw
hen
the
econ
omy
isun
cert
ain
and
the
thre
atof
job
loss
ishi
gh?
Wha
tis
the
valu
eof
fem
inin
ele
ader
ship
styl
esin
extr
eme
cris
ism
anag
emen
t,de
spite
the
docu
men
ted
pref
eren
cefo
rm
ascu
line
lead
ers
unde
rcr
isis
?
Org
aniz
atio
nssh
ould
inte
rven
eto
sim
ulta
neou
sly
(a)
optim
ize
empl
oyee
hum
anca
pita
lac
ross
the
lifes
pan
and
(b)
stre
ngth
enin
tern
alla
bor
mar
kets
(e.g
.,th
roug
hcr
oss-
age
men
tori
ng).
Em
ploy
ers
need
tocr
eate
anen
viro
nmen
tw
here
all
empl
oyee
s,in
clud
ing
raci
alan
det
hnic
min
oriti
es,
real
ize
how
they
can
cont
ribu
teto
the
orga
niza
tion’
sgo
als.
Gre
ater
valu
esh
ould
bepl
aced
onal
tern
ativ
esto
mor
em
ascu
line
lead
ersh
ipst
yles
that
seem
tobe
effe
ctiv
ein
rela
tion
toC
OV
ID-1
9.
Indi
vidu
aldi
ffer
ence
sT
heim
pact
sof
soci
aldi
stan
cing
and
WFH
vary
for
thos
ew
hoar
ehi
gher
(vs.
low
er)
onex
trav
ersi
onan
dco
nsci
entio
usne
ss.
How
dope
rson
ality
trai
ts—
inpa
rtic
ular
,E
xtra
vers
ion
and
Con
scie
ntio
usne
ss—
func
tion
inre
spon
seto
CO
VID
-19?
Org
aniz
atio
nssh
ould
redu
ceun
pred
icta
bilit
y(i
.e.,
prov
ide
clar
ityto
job
role
san
dw
ork
goal
s)to
rest
ore
the
bene
fits
ofco
nsci
entio
usne
ss.
Oth
erin
divi
dual
diff
eren
ces
may
also
mat
ter,
such
asse
gmen
tors
and
inte
grat
ors
stru
gglin
gw
ithW
FH.
How
will
the
pand
emic
dim
inis
h—or
even
reve
rse—
the
adva
ntag
eous
wor
kre
latio
nsty
pica
llyas
soci
ated
with
extr
aver
sion
and
cons
cien
tious
ness
?
“Seg
men
tors
”w
illne
edto
tole
rate
nonw
ork
inte
rrup
tions
,w
here
as“i
nteg
rato
rs”
may
bene
fit
from
segm
entin
gtim
ean
dsp
ace.
Org
aniz
atio
nal
norm
sN
orm
sw
illte
ndto
best
rong
eran
dle
ssfl
exib
le,
lead
ing
toa
grea
ter
tight
ness
ofor
gani
zatio
nal
cultu
res,
whe
nth
eth
reat
ofin
fect
ion
ishi
gh.
As
the
perc
eive
dth
reat
ofin
fect
ion
low
ers,
ther
ew
illbe
aco
rres
pond
ing
loos
enin
gof
norm
s.
How
door
gani
zatio
nsef
fect
ivel
ytig
hten
and
loos
en(o
r“c
lose
”an
d“o
pen”
)in
resp
onse
tosy
stem
icsh
ocks
?
Lea
ders
need
toun
ders
tand
how
tobe
ambi
dext
rous
rega
rdin
gso
cial
norm
s,kn
owin
gw
hen
tode
ploy
tight
ness
and
loos
enes
sas
need
edsi
nce
the
form
erof
fers
prot
ectio
nan
dth
ela
tter
faci
litat
escr
eativ
ityan
din
nova
tion.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anPs
ycho
logi
cal
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
itsal
lied
publ
ishe
rs.
Thi
sar
ticle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
11COVID-19 AND THE WORKPLACE
-
missed some trends or developments that later turn out to besignificant. Among the many current unknowns, it is not yetknown how badly the global economy will be affected andhow quickly it will recover. It is also not yet known if andwhen there will be a vaccine or effective medicine availablenor how widely and quickly it will be distributed.
Notwithstanding the unknowns, it is obvious thatCOVID-19 will be recognized for changing the ways peoplework in fundamental ways (see Table 1 for an overview ofthe implications, issues, and insights we have considered inthis article). For example, COVID-19 abruptly acceleratedthe speed of changes associated with working outside ofcolocated settings. Virtual work practices are likely tospread as organizations realize the cost-savings from struc-turing labor with fewer full-time employees and more con-tractors connected technologically (Spreitzer, Cameron, &Garrett, 2017)—and perhaps with less office space in lightof the health risks known to be associated with conventionalopen-plan offices (Pejtersen, Feveile, Christensen, & Burr,2011). The challenges for individuals working in this man-ner are clear: more people will need to learn to work in waysfar different than how previous generations worked. In thisrespect, COVID-19 makes clear the vulnerability that em-ployees and employers face. As many businesses around theworld will be restructured or disappear due to the pandemic,workers will be retrained or laid off and the economic,social–psychological, and health costs of these actions arelikely to be immense. Indeed, the impacts of the pandemicwill affect some groups of workers more strongly thanothers, for example, based on their age, race and ethnicity,gender, or personality.
An understanding of how these abruptly emergentchanges unfold is important for practitioners who are chart-ing paths forward to address (e.g., with new interventions)the needs of vulnerable categories of employees. For in-stance, workers living alone may have very different virtualworking needs and routines than employees living withfamily members. Also, more authoritarian or bossy leadersmay face different challenges in motivating their workers invirtual environments than more participative and empathicteam leaders, and thus have different training and develop-ment needs. Finally, in dealing with remote working popu-lations, HR professionals must develop new performancemanagement and appraisal systems while occupationalhealth staff should be trained to recognize mental healthissues in remote working populations—and be able to offeronline advice and therapy.
There are also many challenges for research. Our previewof questions that seem likely to become important shouldoffer generalizability beyond the COVID-19 pandemicgiven that “extreme events” often provide windows intoidentifying and understanding dynamics that are importantbut not necessarily visible during normal conditions. It isnot yet known, for example, what the long-term impact of
social isolation and physical distancing protocols will havefor employees. Similarly, research on working from homehas previously focused almost exclusively on people whoopted into WFH by choice but MWFH is quite different.How will changes such as these affect job satisfaction andproductivity?
To consider the long-term effects of COVID-19, organi-zational researchers should perhaps also delve deeper intohistory to learn about how epidemics and pandemics havebeen handled in the past. As Sir Winston Churchill oncesaid, “The longer you can look back, the further you canlook forward.” There are some parallels between the currentcrisis and previous threats such as WWII; the September 11,2001 attacks; and, the 2008 financial crisis. Yet COVID-19is also unique because it is primarily a global health threatand thus requires a different set of adaptive responses (e.g.,physical distancing instead of coming together). Therefore,theory development is needed on how different kinds ofglobal threats and crises shape workplaces in varied ways.Infectious diseases have been a common aspect of humanevolution and have shaped our psychology, behavior, andculture in surprising but predictable ways. As people nowlive and work in globally interdependent communities, in-fectious disease threats such as COVID-19 need to berecognized as part of the workscape. To continue to reap thebenefits from global cooperation, it will be necessary to findsmarter and safer ways of working together.
References
Allen, T. D., Cho, E., & Meier, L. L. (2014). Work–family boundarydynamics. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organiza-tional Behavior, 1, 99 –121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091330
Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective istelecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psycho-logical Science in the Public Interest, 16, 40–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1529100615593273
Alon, T. M., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. (2020). Theimpact of COVID-19 on gender equality. Cambridge, MA: NationalBureau of Economic Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w26947
Anglim, J., Horwood, S., Smillie, L. D., Marrero, R. J., & Wood, J. K.(2020). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from person-ality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146, 279–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000226
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and aproposed theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673–704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00155-8
Antonakis, J., Bastardoz, N., Jacquart, P., & Shamir, B. (2016). Charisma:An ill-defined and ill-measured gift. Annual Review of OrganizationalPsychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 293–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062305
Ashford, S. J., Caza, B. B., & Reid, E. M. (2018). From surviving tothriving in the gig economy: A research agenda for individuals in thenew world of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 23–41.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.11.001
Bacha