Pe i a, Lau a; Ghezzi, Vale io
A icle
Disen angling he p os and cons o lexible wo k
a angemen s: Cu ilinea e ec s on indi idual and
o ganiza ional ou comes
Economies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
MDPI – Mul idisciplina y Digi al Publishing Ins i u e, Basel
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Pe i a, Lau a; Ghezzi, Vale io (2025) : Disen angling he p os and cons o lexible
wo k a angemen s: Cu ilinea e ec s on indi idual and o ganiza ional ou comes, Economies,
ISSN 2227-7099, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 13, Iss. 1, pp. 1-30,
h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/economies13010020
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/329300
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Academic Edi o : Ral Fendel
Recei ed: 18 No embe 2024
Re ised: 7 Janua y 2025
Accep ed: 11 Janua y 2025
Published: 15 Janua y 2025
Ci a ion: Pe i a, L., & Ghezzi, V.
(2025). Disen angling he P os and
Cons o Flexible Wo k A angemen s:
Cu ilinea E ec s on Indi idual and
O ganiza ional Ou comes. Economies,
13(1), 20. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/
economies13010020
Copy igh : © 2025 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/
licenses/by/4.0/).
A icle
Disen angling he P os and Cons o Flexible Wo k A angemen s:
Cu ilinea E ec s on Indi idual and O ganiza ional Ou comes
Lau a Pe i a * and Vale io Ghezzi
Depa men o Psychology, Sapienza Uni e si y o Rome, 00185 Rome, I aly; [email p o ec ed]
*Co espondence: lau a.pe i a@uni oma1.i
Abs ac : The use o lexible wo k a angemen s (e.g., emo e, hyb id) has sp ead du ing
he pandemic and cumula i e s udies p o ide mixed indings on he posi i e s. nega i e
consequences o hese wo king me hods o employees and o ganiza ions. The p esen
s udy examined he po en ially cu ilinea e ec s o employees’ a i ude owa ds lexible
wo k op ions (i.e., lexible wo k o ien a ion; FWO) on indi idual- (i.e., pe o mance, job sa -
is ac ion, s ess, wo k- o- amily con lic , amily- o-wo k con lic ) and o ganiza ion- ela ed
ou comes (i.e., o ganiza ional social suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e o ganiza ional
commi men ). Anonymous su ey da a we e collec ed in 2021 om 1061 in-pe son and
lexible wo ke s nes ed wi hin 100 I alian o ganiza ions. Measu emen in a iance ac oss
he wo subsamples was suppo ed and subsequen s uc u al model analyses sugges ed
a di e en ial pa e n o esul s o in-pe son and lexible wo ke s. Resul s indica ed a
cu ilinea U-shaped ela ionship be ween FWO and o ganiza ional suppo , jus ice, com-
mi men and job sa is ac ion o he in-pe son subsample as compa ed o a posi i e linea
ela ionship o lexible wo ke s. Mo eo e , in bo h samples o lexible and in-p esence
wo ke s, FWO exe ed a posi i e linea e ec on pe o mance and a mainly nega i e linea
e ec on s ess, WFC and FWC. O e all, lexible wo ke s displayed linea ela ionships
among all he s udy a iables, whe eas in-pe son wo ke s showed he cu ilinea e ec s o
FWO on suppo , jus ice, commi men and sa is ac ion, all o which inc eased a high le els
o employees’ posi i e a i ude owa ds FWO. Resul s a e discussed in ligh o he globally
ele a ed a es o lexible wo k a angemen s and mixed indings on hei implemen a ion.
Keywo ds: lexible wo k o ien a ion; cu ilinea e ec s; well-being; p oduc i i y; o ganiza ional
ac o s
1. In oduc ion
Flexible wo king (FW) p ac ices e e o wo king wi hou igid bounda ies wi h espec
o wo king spaces and schedules, such as emo e wo k om home (Coope & Bai d,2015;
G oen e al.,2018). While emo e wo k exis ed be o e he pandemic, i s use has inc eased
due o he co ona i us (COVID-19) ou b eak and he need o wo k sa ely. Be o e he
pandemic, only 17 pe cen o U.S. employees wo ked om home 5 days pe week, bu
his pe cen age inc eased o 44% du ing he pandemic. Simila ly, acco ding o Eu os a
(2021), he pe cen age (12.3%) o Eu opean people wo king emo ely by May 2021 showed
a 140% inc ease compa ed o igu es be o e he pandemic. Despi e his ise, he pos -
pandemic scena io has wi nessed he alling o he peak in emo e jobs bo h in Eu ope and
he US (Ziuznys,2022). Indeed, he use o emo e wo k a he global le el has gene a ed
an eno mous amoun o in o ma ion no only on he bene i s o lexible wo k o bo h
employe s (e.g., o ice space cos s) and employees (e.g., commu ing cos s), bu also on he
Economies 2025,13, 20 h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/economies13010020
Economies 2025,13, 20 2 o 30
p oblems associa ed wi h his change o employe s (e.g., inc eased employee su eillance)
and employees (e.g., blu ed home–wo k bounda ies), ha con ibu e o explaining why
he end o emo e jobs is dec easing (e.g., McGahey,2024).
O e all, schola s and p ac i ione s p o ide mixed indings and opposing a gumen s
on he consequences o emo e wo k, and deba e a ound he po en ial bene i s and pi alls
o emo e jobs and how o blend hem wi h mo e adi ional in-p esence wo k a angemen s.
Mo eo e , exis ing knowledge ends o be pola ized in e ms o i s ocus on he ad an ages
(e.g., Bloom,2024;Lee,1991) as opposed o he p oblems (e.g., Chen,2024a,2024b;Soga
e al.,2022) o lexible wo k a angemen s.
The p esen pape ills his gap and add esses he opposing con en ions on he posi i e
s. nega i e e ec s o lexible wo k p ac ices by examining he po en ial cu ilinea e ec s
o employees’ a i ude owa ds lexible wo k (i.e., lexible wo k o ien a ion; Albion,2004)
on indi idual- (i.e., pe o mance, job sa is ac ion, s ess, wo k- o- amily con lic , amily-
o-wo k con lic ) and o ganiza ion- ela ed ou comes (i.e., o ganiza ional social suppo ,
o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men ). Speci ically, p e ious esea ch
on he ou comes associa ed wi h he use o FW p ac ices has shown posi i e o equi ocal
indings (Albion,2004). On he one hand, lexibili y has been sugges ed o be a low-
cos o ganiza ional p ac ice b inging inc eased p oduc i i y and educed u no e and
absen eeism (Lee,1991) as well as educ ions in physical and psychological symp oms o
job s ain (Thomas & Gans e ,1995) and highe women’s job sa is ac ion, job dedica ion
in hei own ime and likelihood o e u n o wo k a e pa en al lea e (Galinsky & S ein,
1990). On he o he hand, he li e a u e sugges s mino imp o emen s o no change
in o ganiza ional e ec i eness, a endance beha io and job sa is ac ion (Ch is ensen
& S aines,1990). Mo eo e , lexibili y imposed on lowe -paid wo ke s, p edominan ly
women, has been demons a ed o gene a e inancial di icul ies and o impac nega i ely on
wo ke s wi h amily esponsibili ies due o he i egula i y and unp edic abili y o income,
whe eas he bene i s associa ed wi h wo kplace lexibili y in e ms o wo k sa is ac ion and
amily well-being we e ound o occu only when FW p ac ices esul om policies and
wo k cul u es designed o mee he needs o bo h employees and employe s (Cla k,2001).
As such, employees’ posi i e a i udes owa ds lexible wo k op ions (i.e., lexible wo k
o ien a ion) mo e likely de elop when he in oduc ion o lexibili y is employee-d i en
a he han imposed on wo ke s in o de o mee managemen ’s agenda (Albion,2004).
The cu en s udy builds on p e ious esea ch and con o e sial indings and aims
a econciling con lic ing a gumen s on he de imen al, o con e sely, bene icial e ec s
o lexible wo k op ions by posi ing and es ing a cu ilinea ela ionship o employees’
a i ude owa ds FW p ac ices on mul iple wo k- ela ed ou comes. To da e, no s udy has
p e iously in es iga ed he po en ial cu ilinea e ec s o FW p ac ices on pe o mance and
well-being ou comes in o ganiza ions. As such, ou s udy may in o m lexible wo k heo y
(e.g., De me s e al.,2013), occupa ional psychology and he managemen li e a u e by
add essing seemingly puzzling esul s, he eby con ibu ing o disen angling compe i i e
con en ions om schola s and p ac i ione s in he ield.
Below, we begin wi h a b ie o e iew o lexible wo k a angemen s and employ-
ees’ a i ude owa ds lexibili y. Nex , we e iew a gumen s unde pinning he posi i e
s. nega i e ela ionship be ween FWP and indi idual- ela ed ou comes (i.e., pe o -
mance, job sa is ac ion, s ess, wo k- o- amily con lic , amily- o-wo k con lic ) as well as
o ganiza ion- ela ed ou comes (i.e., o ganiza ional social suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice,
a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men ). Finally, we es ou hypo heses in a ield s udy on
1061 employees belonging o 100 o ganiza ions om di e en indus y sec o s.
Economies 2025,13, 20 3 o 30
2. Flexible Wo king P ac ices and Flexible Wo k O ien a ion
In-pe son wo k e e s o he job adi ionally ca ied ou by physically epo ing o a
cen alized loca ion (space) and du ing se wo k hou s ( ime), whe eas lexible wo k models
o en pe ain o emo e wo k pe o med away om common o ice spaces and ime- ela ed
wo k (Jacobs & Pada ic,2015;Waples & B ock Baskin,2021). Hyb id wo king p ac ices
esul om a combined al e na ion o bo h in-pe son and emo e wo k. Flexible wo k
a angemen s a e mainly based on A kinson’s (1984) g oundb eaking “ lexible i m” model
ha enables an o ganiza ion o adap i s wo k o ce o changes in he wo king en i onmen
by se ing non-s anda d ime and space wo king condi ions (e.g., con ac wo ke s, wo king
om home). To da e, he e is a lack o uni o mi y among schola s ega ding he meaning
o FW p ac ices, and he concep has e ol ed o include a ious conno a ions con usingly
used in e changeably (De me s e al.,2013), such as he ollowing: (a) emo e wo k (i.e.,
wo k pe o med away om adi ional o ice spaces and ime- ela ed wo k (Jacobs &
Pada ic,2015;Waples & B ock Baskin,2021)); (b) spa io empo al wo k (i.e., clus e s o
wo ke s collabo a ing in co-wo king spaces o wi hin job sha ing models; (Yu e al.,2019));
(c) on-demand wo k, i.e., wo ke s ha can be called unp edic ably a any ime and wi hou
any ixed e ms o engagemen wi h he o ganiza ion (Ma ica,2019); and (d) sel -di ec ed
wo k (i.e., indi iduals who ha e he eedom in deciding hei e ms o engagemen , such
as sel -employed o eelance wo ke s (Fu muelle e al.,2011;Tudy,2021)).
In pa icula , emo e wo k a iously includes concep s such as elewo king, wo k om
home, elecommu ing, i ual wo k, lex place, lexible hou s/schedules, lex lea e, and is
enabled by echnologies ha allow communica ion ei he synch onously o asynch onously
ou side he o ice space (De me s e al.,2013). Gi en he lack o igid bounda ies a ound
wo king spaces and unde ined wo k ime and schedules, emo e wo k ends o c ea e
pe sonal con lic s o employees due o ulne abili y o amily li e in e up ions (Como
e al.,2020). Mo e impo an ly, emo e wo k may be associa ed wi h p olonged pe iods
o losing social con ac , hus con ibu ing o eelings o loneliness and isola ion as well as
lack o engagemen and low commi men (Fulle & Hi sh,2019;Mulki & Ja amillo,2011).
Mo eo e , lexible wo k schedules, such as lex- ime con ac s, migh lea e employees
ulne able o i egula i ies in income and job insecu i y due o he ins abili y o he job and
u u e inancial plans (Ma ica,2019).
In he p e-pandemic pe iod, lexibili y and mobili y e ol ed o e a ew decades in
esponse o he global economic changes ha p oduced unce ain y in businesses’ ope a ing
condi ions and he consequen need o new o ms o o ganiza ional s uc u ing and
modes o wo king in line wi h he changing needs o he mode n wo k o ce (Rube y
e al.,2016). Mo eo e , he exponen ial g ow h o digi al echnologies has ampli ied such
lexible wo king a angemen s and inc eased he appeal o FW o he wo k o ce and
employe s, making hem desi able cha ac e is ics o al e na i e wo king models (Valenduc
& Vend amin,2016).
Du ing he COVID-19 pandemic, lockdowns and qua an ines sped up he end o
emo e wo k since millions o people wo ldwide we e unable o commu e o wo k and
wo king om home o e ed an al e na i e. In he US, by Oc obe 2020, 71% o wo ke s who
could wo k om home we e doing so, up om 23% p io o COVID-19 (Pa ke e al.,2022).
In Eu ope, p io o he pandemic only 5% o he Eu opean Union wo king popula ion
wo ked a home egula ly, whe eas, since he COVID-19 ou b eak, his 5% has inc eased o
37% (López-Igual & Rod íguez-Mod oño,2020).
In he pos -pandemic e a, we a e globally wi nessing a widescale e u n- o-o ice and
he peak in he ise in emo e jobs is alling, a descending end in igu es ha s a in he
win e o 2021 compa ed o he summe o 2022. In he US, he emo e-jobs sha e eached a
peak (17.2%) in 2021 and hen s eadily dec eased o 11.9% in 2022, wi h Cali o nia epo ing
Economies 2025,13, 20 4 o 30
he highes sha e. In Eu ope, he emo e-jobs sha e eached a simila peak (19.9%) in 2021
and hen s eadily dec eased o 9.1% in 2022, wi h he Uni ed Kingdom epo ing he highes
sha e. A he global le el, in he i s qua e o 2022, he g ow h o emo e-jobs sha es
s abilized and epo ed a sligh ly nega i e end (Ziuznys,2022).
Despi e hese s iking numbe s, he p e alence o emo e wo k s ongly a ies ac oss
di e en indus y sec o s and occupa ions, as well as ac oss coun ies. Fo example, sup-
po se ices, as well as sec o s ha in ol e he physical manipula ion o ma e ials and/o
objec s, such as manu ac u ing, a e no ypical elewo kable sec o s, whe eas IT and o he
communica ion se ices ( elecommunica ions), inance and insu ance, go e nmen and
knowledge-in ensi e business se ices a e occupa ional sec o s whe e he shi o elewo k
has been mo e p e alen (Eu opean Union,2020). In 2021, he indus ies wi h he la ges
sha e o emo e jobs we e IT and Se ices (22.1%), In e ne (18%), Social O ganiza ion
(16.4%), S a ing and Rec ui ing (7.5%) and Compu e So wa e (6%) (Ziuznys,2022). In
Eu ope, he indus ies wi h he mos emo e jobs a ailable in 2021 we e in o ma ion ech-
nology (e.g., cybe secu i y, so wa e p og amming, on -end/back-end de elopmen ),
digi al ma ke ing (e.g., blog w i ing, sea ch engine op imiza ion), cons uc ion (e.g., design-
ing, inancing, and hi ing con ac o s, no cons uc ion ope a ions pe o med on-si e) and
cus ome ca e (McGahey,2024). Mo eo e , o ganiza ion size is an addi ional di e en ia ing
ac o , and companies wi h 51–200 and 1001–5000 employees end o o e he mos emo e
job oppo uni ies (Ziuznys,2022).
Rela edly, emo e wo k dis ibu ion among wo ke s is also di e en depending on
educa ion and income. Fo example, in he U.S., he highe -educa ed and highes -paid
wo ke s (e.g., mo e han $250,000 annually) ha e he g ea es access o emo e wo k and
a e concen a ed in IT, inance and p o essional and business se ice oles (e.g., manage s,
accoun an s, HR ep esen a i es), whe eas lowe -paid wo ke s (e.g., less han $50,000 pe
yea ) o en hold in-pe son jobs in e ail, anspo a ion and wa ehousing and ho els and
ood se ice (Bloom,2024).
Di e ences in emo e wo k p e alence can also be seen ac oss coun ies. While in
se e al coun ies like he US and UK, companies ha e ansi ioned in-o ice oles o become
ei he en i ely o pa ially emo e (i.e., hyb id wo king models), o he na ions ha e no
emb aced emo e wo k and a e e u ning o he on-si e o ice, o en because o echnological
o logis ical ba ie s o elewo k as well as cul u al ac o s (Johanson,2022). Fo example,
in F ance, only 29% o F ench wo ke s epo ed o wo k emo ely “a leas once a week” as
compa ed o 51% o Ge mans, 50% o I alians, 42% o B i s and 36% o Spania ds (Baumlin
e al.,2022). Rela edly, Japan showed almos no up ick in emo e jobs be ween Janua y
2020 and Sep embe 2021 and, hus, quali ies as a poo candida e o emo e wo k, likely
because o a highly social wo k s uc u e wi h employees wo king in e dependen ly in
eams, making assessmen s as a g oup, and needing o ha e in-pe son mee ings because
non e bal communica ion plays a e y impo an ole. O e all, he UK, Spain, Ge many
and Finland appea o be he op na ions o emo e wo ke s in Eu ope (Johanson,2022).
While emo e wo k exis ed be o e he pandemic, he COVID-19 ou b eak has u he
highligh ed some issues associa ed wi h FW and also e ealed new conce ns, hus disclos-
ing he hidden p oblems o FW models (Fu ma´nczyk & Ka´zmie czyk,2020). Speci ically,
he implemen a ion o FW models has no ewo hy consequences o digi al echnology
pla o ms, wo k o ce well-being, o ganiza ional s uc u es and physical wo kspace designs
(Ben ley e al.,2016;Johnson e al.,2020), bu also aises issues on wo ke moni o ing and
con ol p ocedu es ha ha e an impac on bo h employe s’ and employees’ igh s and ha e
spa ked wo ies om he egula o y communi y (Choi,2018;Pede sen,2017). Rela edly,
wo king om home may ha e unce ain p oduc i i y e ec s ha dis u b manage s and, in
esponse o less in-o ice wo k, 96% o employe s a e s epping up elec onic su eillance
Economies 2025,13, 20 5 o 30
and using employee-moni o ing so wa e, much o he annoyance o employees (Bloom,
2024;Resume Builde ,2023). Mo eo e , acco ding o US s a is ics, whi e-colla emo e
wo ke s a e 35% mo e likely o be e mina ed han in-pe son colleagues (Chen,2024b), and
he ise o AI will pa icula ly h ea en ully emo e wo ke s assigned o mo e epe i i e
and ou ine asks such as pay oll o da a en y (Mok,2023).
Flexible wo k o ien a ion (FWO; Albion,2004) e e s o wo ke s’ a i ude owa ds
wo kplace lexibili y and lexible wo k pa e ns. FWO cap u es wo ke s’ posi ions wi h
ega d o he use o FW me hods and he po en ial bene i s o ba ie s o he use o emo e
and hyb id wo k, such as he possibili y o balance one’s li e commi men s o , con e sely,
he ea o becoming disconnec ed o excluded om one’s wo kplace and mo e exposed
o pay and/o ca ee loss, as well as he endency o conside lexible wo ke s as less
commi ed o s igma ized. Fo example, employees wi h a nega i e a i ude owa ds FW in
e ms o pe cei ed s igma om o he s in case o FW usage o ea o being excluded om
wo kplace li e and becoming socially isola ed a e mo e associa ed wi h lowe usage a es
o FW a angemen s (Albion,2004).
Indeed, in he pos -pandemic scena io, FW is inc easingly eques ed by employees
bu une enly emb aced by employe s. In Eu ope, 50% o I alians, 42% o B i s, and 36% o
Spania ds wan o wo k emo ely, and a su ey among Ge many companies (Bea dsley,
2022) ound ha h ee ou o ou wo ke s wan ed emo e wo k e en a e he pandemic,
whe eas only 29% o F ench wo ke s wan ed FW (Baumlin e al.,2022). Acco ding o a 2021
epo (Zoe Talen Solu ions,2023), 84% o employees who wo ked emo ely du ing he
pandemic we e e en willing o ake a pay cu o a FW a angemen wi h hei employe s.
As such, examining wo ke s’ a i ude owa ds FW may signi ican ly con ibu e o explain-
ing he ou comes associa ed wi h newly emb aced wo king models and how o na iga e
he mode n wo kplace.
3. Flexible Wo k O ien a ion and Ou comes
The p e-pandemic li e a u e on FW has al eady highligh ed ha lexibili y may ha e
no only posi i e bu also nega i e e ec s and is he e o e an ambiguous concep ha
may b ing sho - e m economic success and compe i i e ad an ages as well as nega i e
side-e ec s on wo ke s and socie y (e.g., De me s e al.,2013). Th oughou he pandemic,
FW has been s udied empi ically (e.g., Za ei e al.,2021) and concep ually in e ms o
i s impac on he u u e o wo k (e.g., Waples & B ock Baskin,2021) as well as h ough
pe sonal na a i es (e.g., Obenau ,2021), and cumula i e e idence u he suppo s ha
FW a angemen s come wi h many ad an ages bu also show some d awbacks.
An o e iew o FW bene i s may include he ollowing ac o s and ela ed mo i es
(e.g., Bi ,2023): (a) a educed commu e (i.e., wo ke s a oid making he ip o a physical
wo kplace); (b) g ea e wo k–li e balance (i.e., FW makes i easie o schedule ime and mee
amily needs and pe sonal obliga ions); (c) lowe ed childca e cos s (i.e., wo pa en s wo k-
ing emo ely migh coo dina e and a oid paying o childca e); (d) a cus omized wo kspace
(i.e., a pe sonalized se up may inc ease mo i a ion, p oduc i i y and sa is ac ion); (e) pe -
sonal con ol (i.e., FW scheduling gi es wo ke s an inc eased sense o empowe men o e
wo k and en i onmen and educes he isk o s ess and dissa is ac ion); ( ) g ea e p o-
duc i i y (i.e., sel -se wo k schedules and hy hms may help synch onize ac i i ies wi h
one’s own ch ono ype and acili a e wo k); and (g) educed a diness and absen eeism (i.e.,
a sel -se wo k schedule helps in mee ing wo ke s’ needs and a lack o commu ing p e en s
being la e).
An ou line o he main d awbacks o FW and ela ed mo i es may include he ollow-
ing (e.g., Bi ,2023;Soga e al.,2022): (a) inc eased wo k–li e con lic (i.e., di icul ies in
managing wo k– amily bounda ies, such as pe sonal space and wo kspace); (b) an inclina-
Economies 2025,13, 20 6 o 30
ion o wo k mo e and heal h p oblems (i.e., di icul ies in disconnec ing when wo king a
home and a highe isk o s ess/ a igue); (c) educed p oduc i i y (i.e., di icul ies wi h
adap ing o lexibili y and a lack o schedule/o e sigh ); (d) diminished communica ion
wi h s a (i.e., in e ac ing h ough ideo o phone o emails is no he same as speaking
wi h someone in pe son); (e) a dec eased sense o eamwo k (i.e., eelings o isola ion, he
lack o cowo ke s’ p esence and a lack o a sense o communi y as expe ienced on-si e);
and ( ) diminished coo dina ion and inc eased su eillance (i.e., FW equi es mo e e o
on he pa o manage s o include emo e wo ke s and coo dina e in-pe son and emo e
wo ke s as well as he highe con ol/su eillance o emo e wo ke s).
As can be seen, some widely acknowledged ad an ages o FW a e also highligh ed as
i s pi alls, and he li e a u e p o ides mixed inconclusi e indings on FW conno a ions.
Below, we del e in o FW’s consequences o o ganiza ion- ela ed ac o s such as o ganiza-
ional suppo and jus ice and a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men , as well as indi idual
ou comes ela ed o pe o mance, s ess, wo k–li e balance and job sa is ac ion.
Pe cei ed o ganiza ional jus ice e e s o employees’ pe cep ions o jus ice and ai ness
expe ienced wi hin di e en domains o o ganiza ional li e (Colqui ,2001), such as equi y
in he alloca ion o esou ces and ou come decisions (i.e., dis ibu i e jus ice), employees’
oice o in luence du ing he p ocess ha leads o decision ou comes being ca ied ou
e hically and accu a ely (i.e., p ocedu al jus ice), decision-making p ocesses being candidly
explained (i.e., in o ma ional jus ice) and he sensi i e and espec ul ea men o em-
ployees (i.e., in e pe sonal jus ice). The li e a u e on FW be o e and du ing he pandemic
sugges s se e al unwan ed consequences o emo e wo k wi h espec o jus ice pe cep ions.
Speci ically, home wo king may hampe isibili y and weaken he social cues ha unde pin
us among eamma es (Allen e al.,2015;Ha e malz & Rieme ,2021) as well as ca ee
p og ession, such as a lack o p omo ions and unpaid o e ime (Nohe & Sonn ag,2014;Ju-
nio e al.,2020). Rela edly, FW p og ams may no be amily- iendly, and some employees
may be denied egula i y and p edic abili y o employmen (Albion,2004), hus inc easing
wo ke s’ job insecu i y (Kolasa e al.,2021) and he necessi y o ind o he sou ces o income
(Nohe & Sonn ag,2014;Junio e al.,2020). An addi ional unin ended consequence e e s o
he inc eased con ol o e employees’ wo k a angemen s (Cla k,2001) and he pe cep ion
o o ganiza ional su eillance and a lack o us (Soga e al.,2022). Indeed, he ad e se
consequences o FW a e pa icula ly associa ed wi h p og ams imposed on employees (i.e.,
low p ocedu al jus ice), whe eas he bene i s associa ed wi h wo kplace lexibili y appea
when he p ocess is employee-d i en, likely because employees eel he need o espond o
o ganiza ional ai ness wi h loyal y (Albion,2004).
O ganiza ional suppo e e s o employees’ pe cep ion o a o able ea men ecei ed
om hei o ganiza ion (Mowday e al.,1982) as well as hei belie s ha hei o ganiza ion
ca es abou hei wel a e and alues hei con ibu ions (Eisenbe ge e al.,2001). To
da e, he e is s ill li le li e a u e on he link be ween o ganiza ional suppo and FW. On
he one hand, p e ious s udies sugges ha FW may c ea e less sha ed expe ience o he
o ganiza ion and a lack o physical p esence and he suppo o colleagues in pa icula (Bi ,
2023;Raghu am,2014). On he o he hand, employees’ pe cep ion o a s ong o ganiza ional
suppo o he use o FW may a enua e he nega i e e ec s associa ed wi h FW (e.g.,
limi a ions due o pa en ing esponsibili ies) and con ibu e o o e coming ba ie s o FW
(Albion,2004).
A ec i e o ganiza ional commi men e e s o he emo ional ies employees de elop
wi h he o ganiza ion due o posi i e wo k expe iences and e lec s hei willingness o
de o e e o s o i s success (Meye & Allen,1997). Indeed, emo e wo k and physical dis-
ance o en come wi h eelings o isola ion and disconnec edness om one’s wo kplace and
o ganiza ion (Pe i a & Ghezzi,2023;Wige & Whi e,2022) as well as he agmen a ion o
Economies 2025,13, 20 7 o 30
wo k ela ionships (Ha e malz & Rieme ,2021;Soga e al.,2022) and he e osion o cohesion
in o ganiza ions (Ben ley e al.,2016), all o which con ibu e o weakening he emo ional
bond wi h one’s company. Howe e , he li e a u e also sugges s ha employee- iendly FW
policies (i.e., employees’ choice) elici a posi i e psychological con ac mechanism acco d-
ing o which employees eel he need o espond by o e ing, in e u n, highe commi men
and loyal y o hei company (Scandu a & Lankau,1997).
Rela edly, job sa is ac ion e e s o a pleasu able o posi i e emo ional s a e esul ing
om job expe iences (Locke,1976) and hus indica es psychological esponses o an in-
di idual’s job o pleasan aspec s o he job. The li e a u e on he link be ween FW and
wo ke s’ sa is ac ion p o ides a a ie y o mixed indings. Some esea ch sugges s ha
emo e wo k and he ela ed lack o social in e ac ion and eelings o isola ion may be asso-
cia ed wi h less wo k sa is ac ion (Mihhailo a e al.,2011) as well as an e osion o cohesion
ha nega i ely e ec s wo k commi men in eams and he subsequen ad e se eelings
o job dissa is ac ion (Jacobs & Pada ic,2015;Za ei e al.,2021). Con e sely, o he p e-
and pos -pandemic esea ch sugges s ha emo e wo k inc eases job sa is ac ion (Ben ley
e al.,2016), ha home-based elewo ke s epo g ea e le els o sa is ac ion han o he
wo ke s (Whea ley,2012) and ha emo e wo k has a signi ican ela ionship wi h job
sa is ac ion ia employee’s au onomy (Jamaludin & Kamal,2023). Mo eo e , a s udy ound
ha 65% o emo e wo ke s epo being “ex emely sa is ied” wi h hei jobs, compa ed
o jus 34% o o ice-based employees (Wicke sham,2023). Finally, some esea ch has also
ound inconclusi e indings. Ch is ensen and S aines (1990) ound mino imp o emen s
o no change in job sa is ac ion a e FW implemen a ion. Bellmann and Hüble (2021)
ound no clea e ec s o emo e wo k on job sa is ac ion, whe eas Cla k (2001) ound
highe wo k sa is ac ion in associa ion wi h FW only when lexibili y was designed o mee
employees’ needs.
The li e a u e on FW and he wo k– amily in e ace p o ides pola ized indings as
well. Wo king emo ely wi hou s ic space and ime es ic ions o en implies a wo k-
om-home a angemen ins ead o wo king in an on-si e o ice o cubicle (Coope & Bai d,
2015). As such, home-based wo k o en comes wi h he need o juggle he ole equi emen s
o wo k and amily o , a he , he mos cen al and salien domains in a pe son’s li e (Wei
e al.,2016). While wo k– amily balance e e s o he expe ience o a s a e o well-being
in which employees’ wo k li e and amily li e a e pe cei ed as gene ally compa ible (Wei
e al.,2016), wo k– amily con lic (G eenhaus & Beu ell,1985;G zywacz & Deme ou i,
2013) appea s when he wo social oles impose con lic ing ole expec a ions, such as
wo k equi emen s in e e ing wi h amily obliga ions (i.e., wo k– amily con lic ; WFC)
and amily hinde ing wo k (i.e., amily–wo k con lic ; FWC), hus c ea ing psychological
con lic and ole o e load (Kahn e al.,1964).
On he one hand, FW has blu ed he sepa a e domain s uc u e o wo k and home,
and was ound o exe a debili a ing e ec on he home se ing as i becomes a mul ipu pose
si e o p o essional wo k bu also domes ic ac i i ies such as childca e and leisu e ac i i ies
(Bonco i,2020;C aw o d,2020;So oui,2021). O e lapping wo k and li e unc ions in he
same space and ex ended demands on wo ke ime we e epo ed o be associa ed wi h
poo wo k–li e balance (Como e al.,2020) and o damage amily s uc u es and inc ease
wo k–li e con lic s (Bellmann & Hüble ,2021;O’Conno & Cech,2018). On he o he hand,
FW a angemen s ha e also been sugges ed o make i easie o adjus amilies’ needs o
pe sonal obliga ions wi h wo k equi emen s due o less commu ing ime and he abili y
o op imize childca e a ound a lexible wo k ime schedule (e.g., Bi ,2023;Saxena &
Mokh a ian,2010;Williams,2008). Howe e , he posi i e impac o FW on wo ke s’ li es
seems o also depend on he wo ke s’ gende (e.g., a highe bu den o childca e o women
and mo e wo k– amily con lic ; (e.g., Albion,2004;Bonco i,2020;D ew & Humbe ,2012))
Economies 2025,13, 20 8 o 30
and FW policies (e.g., women wo king o companies wi h amily- iendly FW policies
wo ked mo e in hei own ime and we e mo e likely o e u n o wo k a e pa en al lea e;
Galinsky and S ein (1990)).
Addi ional con o e sial indings o FW’s e ec s ha e been epo ed wi h ega d o
wo ke s’ well-being. Some esea ch sugges s ha emo e wo k and he blu ing o pe sonal
li e and wo king ime os e excessi e o e ime wo king (Taha o i,2015) and he eeling
ha one is wo king all he ime, which can also be because o a lack o bounda ies in he
home be ween pe sonal space and wo kspace and he cons an a ailabili y o compu e s a
all hou s (Bi ,2023). Remo e wo k echnology induces elewo ke s’ echnos ess (Suh &
Lee,2017) as indi iduals emain swi ched on o hei digi al echnology pla o ms o wo k
(Tu kle,2008;Cech & O’Conno ,2017) and hus expe ience o e wo k, exhaus ion and o he
wo kload p essu es. The pandemic pa icula ly highligh ed he inabili y o disconnec (e.g.,
wo kaholism) om wo k and ela ed heal h p oblems (Lockwood & Na h,2021;Mülle
e al.,2018) such as s ess, men al heal h impai men and bu nou (Peasley e al.,2020).
Remo e wo k also educes spon aneous and casual social in e ac ions as expe ienced in on-
si e o ice and os e s eelings o social isola ion and po en ial dep ession issues (In eg a ed
Bene i s Ins i u e,2024) and highe suicide a es (Neis & Neil,2020). Con e sely, FW is
epo ed o sa e commu ing ime and ips, hus educing he s ess and cos s associa ed
wi h a eling (Bi ,2023) as well as acili a ing a mo e e icien use o ime and he se ing
o a mo e pe sonalized way o wo king ha imp o es pe sonal well-being (Wige & Whi e,
2022). Indeed, esea ch has ound ha 41% o in-o ice pe sonnel end o expe ience mo e
bu nou in compa ison o 26% o emo e wo ke s, who a e also gene ally happie han
hei in-o ice coun e pa s (Wicke sham,2023).
FW’s e ec s on elewo ke s’ pe o mance and p oduc i i y a e again con o e sial (e.g.,
Ismail & Michael,2023). On he one hand, emo e wo k om home may expose indi iduals
o asks ha canno be pe o med om home o di icul ies in accessing needed da a o
documen s, and may be associa ed wi h mo e dis ac ions and di icul y wi h keeping
ocus when alone (Bolisani e al.,2020), hus ad e sely a ec ing employees’ p oduc i i y.
Mo eo e , he li e a u e sugges s ha lexible wo ke s migh unde go he social s igma
o being conside ed as less commi ed and de o ed han adi ional wo ke s who a e
conside ed mo e p oduc i e (Cech & Blai -Loy,2014). Women in pa icula end o unde go
he bias agains mo he wo ke s and a nega i e assessmen o hei pe o mance (Fulle &
Hi sh,2019). As no ed abo e, he lack o a conc e e wo king schedule and o e sigh o
emo e wo k may dep i e wo ke s o a sou ce o mo i a ion o assu ance o en associa ed
wi h in-o ice wo k and, hus, con ibu e o educing wo ke s’ p oduc i i y (Bi ,2023).
Indeed, he li e a u e sugges s ha elewo kcomes wi h a highe manage ial need o
moni o and coo dina e elewo ke s as con ol mechanisms (Lockwood & Na h,2021;
Richa dson,2017) and Eu opean employe s ha e conce ns wi h ega d o emo e wo ke s’
p oduc i i y (Zoe Talen Solu ions,2023). On he o he hand, esea ch sugges s ha du ing
he pandemic 90% o emo e wo ke s epo ed ha hey we e ei he as p oduc i e o e en
mo e p oduc i e when compa ed o wo king in he o ice (Zoe Talen Solu ions,2023), and
52% o UK s a enjoyed a be e wo k–li e balance ha b ed g ea e p oduc i i y (Lund
e al.,2020). In pa icula , he oppo uni y o lexibly s uc u e one’s own wo k and adjus
one’s wo k schedule o pe sonal needs and p e e ences may ensu e he g ea es le el o
p oduc i i y (e.g., Bi ,2023;De Sme e al.,2023).
Indeed, an addi ional ecen s udy on mo e han 6000 employees wo king ull- ime
ac oss he wo ld a o ganiza ions employing o e 500 employees which assessed he impac
o mode n s a i ied wo kplaces (i.e., emo e, hyb id and onsi e wo kspaces) on employees’
bond wi h hei o ganiza ion and ela ed ou comes p o ided indings ha con lic wi h
heo ies ou ing he essen ial impo ance o in-p esence wo k (Dalessand o & Lo ell,2024).
Economies 2025,13, 20 15 o 30
Table 2. Resul s o es s o measu emen in a iance ac oss in-pe son and lexible wo ke s.
Model Fi Model Compa ison
Models (M) YBχ2d RMSEA (90% CI)
CFI
TLI
SRMR
∆MScaled ∆YBχ2(∆d ) ∆CFI
Measu emen Models
Model in-pe son 1080.14 ***
528
0.043 (0.039−0.046)
0.938
0.926 0.053 − − −
Model lexible 910.59 ***
528
0.052 (0.046−0.058)
0.910
0.900 0.066 − − −
Measu emen In a iance
Models
M1: Con igu al 2001.59 ***
1056
0.046 (0.043−0.049)
0.929
0.915 0.058 − − −
M2: Me ic 2015.01 ***
1079
0.045 (0.042−0.048)
0.929
0.917 0.060 M2-M1 19.23(23) ns 0
M3: Scala 2074.52 ***
1103
0.046 (0.043−0.049)
0.927
0.916 0.060 M3-M2 58.88(24) *** 0.002
M3a: Scala pa ial 2045.84 ***
1100
0.045 (0.042−0.048)
0.928
0.918 0.060 M3a-M2 31.24(21) ns 0.001
M4: S ic 2040.61 ***
1134
0.044 (0.041−0.047)
0.931
0.924 0.062 M4-M3a 27.44(34) ns −0.003
M5. La en Means 2064.24 ***
1144
0.044 (0.041−0.047)
0.930
0.923 0.065 M5-M4 23.11(10) ns 0.001
No e. A each s ep in he sequence o in a iance es s, all ea lie cons ain s emain in place. YB
χ
2 = Yuan–Ben le
chi-squa e; d = deg ees o eedom; RMSEA = Roo Mean-Squa e E o o App oxima ion; CFI = Compa a i e
Fi Index; TLI = Tucke –Lewis Index; SRMR = S anda dized Roo Mean Squa ed Residual.
ns
= no s a is ically
signi ican o α= 0.01; *** p< 0.001. Mul ig oup Linea and Quad a ic SEM Models.
A mul ig oup SEM model whe e he e ec s o independen la en a iables on he
a ge ou comes we e cons ained o equali ies ac oss g oups was compa ed wi h he mos
s ingen model es ablished in a p e ious analysis (M5). This model eached a sa is ying
i : YB
χ2(d =1176)
= 2115.809, RMSEA = 0.044 (90% Con idence In e als: 0.044
−
0.047),
CFI = 0.929,
TLI = 0.924, SRMR = 0.069. Since his model did no esul in a wo sening o
model i wi h espec o M5 (
∆
YB
χ2(∆d =32)
= 51.10 wi h p> 0.01 and
∆
CFI = 0.001), we can
easonably conclude ha he posi ed linea s uc u al e ec s did no a y ac oss g oups.
Finally, we es ed and compa ed he wo MM-SEM models desc ibed abo e (i.e., S0
wi h quad a ic e ec s ee o a y ac oss g oups and S1 whe e hey we e cons ained o
equali y). Since he mos es ic i e model (S1) esul ed in a highe sample-size-adjus ed
BIC (i.e., ssBIC
S0
= 72,744.90 s. ssBIC
S1
= 72,751.90) and hei di ec s a is ical compa ison
was signi ican (D
(d =8)
= 22.08, p< 0.01), we concluded ha one o mo e quad a ic e ec s
signi ican ly di e ac oss in-pe son and lexible wo ke s. Thus, S0 was conside ed he inal
empi ical model, as well as i s es ima es.
Speci ically, o he in-pe son wo ke s, while he linea e ec s we e exac ly he same as
he lexible g oup (see below), he esul s indica ed he s anda dized signi ican quad a ic e -
ec o FWO on o ganiza ional suppo (0.12, p< 0.05), o ganiza ional jus ice (0.13,
p< 0.001),
o ganiza ional commi men (0.14, p< 0.001) and job sa is ac ion (0.12, p< 0.001), and a
signi ican linea posi i e e ec on pe o mance (0.37, p< 0.001) as well as a s anda dized
linea nega i e e ec on WFC (
−
0.31, p< 0.001), FWC (
−
0.39, p< 0.001) and s ess (
−
0.35,
p< 0.001). As an example, he e ec o FWO on o ganiza ional suppo o he in-pe son
g oup was signi ican ly s eepe o high le els o FWO, while i was a he la o low
o a e age le els o he independen la en a iable (i.e., be o e he in lec ion poin o he
U-shaped e ec ). In e ms o con ol a iables, o ganiza ion ype (public s. p i a e) was
only signi ican ly and nega i ely associa ed wi h a ec i e commi men (
−
0.14,
p< 0.01),
pe o mance (
−
0.12, p< 0.01) and job sa is ac ion (
−
0.17, p< 0.01), and posi i ely associ-
a ed wi h s ess (0.18, p< 0.001). Flexible wo k policy (employees’ choice s. imposed by
employe ) was only signi ican ly and nega i ely associa ed wi h o ganiza ional suppo
(
−
0.15, p< 0.01), o ganiza ional jus ice (
−
0.12, p< 0.05), a ec i e commi men (
−
0.18,
p< 0.001)
and job sa is ac ion (
−
0.12, p< 0.05), whe eas wo kload was signi ican ly and
posi i ely associa ed wi h WFC (0.42, p< 0.001), FWC (0.13, p< 0.05), s ess (0.16, p< 0.05)
and pe o mance (0.15, p< 0.01). O e all, he model explained 14% o he a iance in
o ganiza ional suppo , 21% o o ganiza ional jus ice, 15% o o ganiza ional commi men ,
Economies 2025,13, 20 16 o 30
18% o job sa is ac ion, 15% o pe o mance, 35% o WFC, 21% o FWC and 21% o he
a iance in s ess. Mo eo e , he inc emen al added alue o quad a ic e ec s e lec ed an
addi ional 5% explained a iance in o ganiza ional suppo , 7% o o ganiza ional jus ice,
6% o o ganiza ional commi men , 6% o job sa is ac ion, 2% o pe o mance, 0% o WFC,
1% o FWC, and 0% o he a iance in s ess, hus lending suppo o he inc emen al
ole o cu ilinea e ec s in explaining a iance in he da a, and u he s eng hening he
obus ness o model S0 including quad a ic e ms o almos all la en ou comes.
Fo he lexible wo ke s, he esul s showed he non-signi ican s anda dized quad a ic
e ec s o FWO on he ou comes. Mo eo e , he esul s e ealed a signi ican linea posi i e
e ec o FWO on o ganiza ional suppo (0.25, p< 0.001), o ganiza ional jus ice (0.37,
p< 0.001),
o ganiza ional commi men (0.27, p< 0.001), job sa is ac ion (0.36, p< 0.001) and
pe o mance (0.36, p< 0.001), as well as a s anda dized linea nega i e e ec on WFC (
−
0.31,
p< 0.001), FWC (
−
0.40, p< 0.001) and s ess (
−
0.35, p< 0.001). In e ms o con ol a iables,
o ganiza ion ype (public s. p i a e) was only signi ican ly and nega i ely associa ed
wi h a ec i e commi men (
−
0.15,
p< 0.01),
pe o mance (
−
0.12, p< 0.01), s ess (
−
0.18,
p< 0.001)
and job sa is ac ion (
−
0.17, p< 0.01). Flexible wo k policy (employees’ choice
s. imposed by employe ) was signi ican ly and nega i ely associa ed wi h o ganiza ional
suppo (
−
0.15, p< 0.01), a ec i e commi men (
−
0.18, p< 0.001), o ganiza ional jus ice
(
−
0.12, p< 0.05) and job sa is ac ion (
−
0.12, p< 0.05), whe eas wo kload was signi ican ly
and posi i ely associa ed wi h WFC (0.43, p< 0.001), FWC (0.14, p< 0.05), pe o mance
(0.15, p< 0.01) and s ess (0.16, p< 0.05). O e all, he model explained 10% o he a iance
in o ganiza ional suppo , 18% o o ganiza ional jus ice, 10% o o ganiza ional commi men ,
16% o job sa is ac ion, 16% o pe o mance, 32% o WFC, 18% o FWC and 19% o he
a iance in s ess. Taken oge he , ou esul s p o ide pa ial suppo o Hypo hesis 1a, 1b,
1c and 1d (i.e., cu ilinea e ec s only o in-pe son wo ke s), bu no o Hypo hesis 1e, 1 ,
1g and 1h (i.e., linea e ec s o bo h in-pe son and lexible wo ke s).
In o de o e alua e he o m o he signi ican quad a ic s. linea e ec s, we used
he Excel plo ing p og am de eloped by Dawson (2014). As can be seen in Figu e 1a–h,
he esul s indica ed a cu ilinea U-shaped ela ionship be ween FWO and o ganiza ional
suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion o he
in-pe son subsample, such ha all ou comes appea a he highes le el only o e y high
le els o FWO. Tha is, he le els o hese la en ou comes end o diminish as FWO inc eases
and hen u n posi i e, bu only when FWO eaches e y high le els, such ha employees
wi h mode a e le els o FWO epo ed he lowes le els o pe cei ed o ganiza ional suppo ,
o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion compa ed
o employees wi h high le els o FWO, who showed he highes le els o pe cei ed suppo ,
jus ice, commi men and sa is ac ion.
Economies 2025, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 o 32
o ganiza ional suppo , 21% o o ganiza ional jus ice, 15% o o ganiza ional commi men ,
18% o job sa is ac ion, 15% o pe o mance, 35% o WFC, 21% o FWC and 21% o he
a iance in s ess. Mo eo e , he inc emen al added alue o quad a ic effec s eflec ed an
addi ional 5% explained a iance in o ganiza ional suppo , 7% o o ganiza ional jus ice,
6% o o ganiza ional commi men , 6% o job sa is ac ion, 2% o pe o mance, 0% o WFC,
1% o FWC, and 0% o he a iance in s ess, hus lending suppo o he inc emen al ole
o cu ilinea effec s in explaining a iance in he da a, and u he s eng hening he o-
bus ness o model S0 including quad a ic e ms o almos all la en ou comes.
Fo he flexible wo ke s, he esul s showed he non-significan s anda dized quad-
a ic effec s o FWO on he ou comes. Mo eo e , he esul s e ealed a significan linea
posi i e effec o FWO on o ganiza ional suppo (0.25, p < 0.001), o ganiza ional jus ice
(0.37, p < 0.001), o ganiza ional commi men (0.27, p < 0.001), job sa is ac ion (0.36, p <
0.001) and pe o mance (0.36, p < 0.001), as well as a s anda dized linea nega i e effec on
WFC (−0.31, p < 0.001), FWC (−0.40, p < 0.001) and s ess (−0.35, p < 0.001). In e ms o
con ol a iables, o ganiza ion ype (public s. p i a e) was only significan ly and nega-
i ely associa ed wi h affec i e commi men (−0.15, p < 0.01), pe o mance (−0.12, p < 0.01),
s ess (−0.18, p < 0.001) and job sa is ac ion (−0.17, p < 0.01). Flexible wo k policy (employ-
ees’ choice s. imposed by employe ) was significan ly and nega i ely associa ed wi h
o ganiza ional suppo (−0.15, p < 0.01), affec i e commi men (−0.18, p < 0.001), o ganiza-
ional jus ice (−0.12, p < 0.05) and job sa is ac ion (−0.12, p < 0.05), whe eas wo kload was
significan ly and posi i ely associa ed wi h WFC (0.43, p < 0.001), FWC (0.14, p < 0.05),
pe o mance (0.15, p < 0.01) and s ess (0.16, p < 0.05). O e all, he model explained 10%
o he a iance in o ganiza ional suppo , 18% o o ganiza ional jus ice, 10% o o ganiza-
ional commi men , 16% o job sa is ac ion, 16% o pe o mance, 32% o WFC, 18% o FWC
and 19% o he a iance in s ess. Taken oge he , ou esul s p o ide pa ial suppo o
Hypo hesis 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d (i.e., cu ilinea effec s only o in-pe son wo ke s), bu no
o Hypo hesis 1e, 1 , 1g and 1h (i.e., linea effec s o bo h in-pe son and flexible wo ke s).
In o de o e alua e he o m o he significan quad a ic s. linea effec s, we used
he Excel ploing p og am de eloped by Dawson (2014). As can be seen in Figu e 1a–h,
he esul s indica ed a cu ilinea U-shaped ela ionship be ween FWO and o ganiza-
ional suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion o
he in-pe son subsample, such ha all ou comes appea a he highes le el only o e y
high le els o FWO. Tha is, he le els o hese la en ou comes end o diminish as FWO
inc eases and hen u n posi i e, bu only when FWO eaches e y high le els, such ha
employees wi h mode a e le els o FWO epo ed he lowes le els o pe cei ed o gani-
za ional suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, affec i e o ganiza ional commi men and job sa -
is ac ion compa ed o employees wi h high le els o FWO, who showed he highes le els
o pe cei ed suppo , jus ice, commi men and sa is ac ion.
—— In-pe son wo ke s —— Flexible wo ke s
(a) (b)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
O ganiza ional Suppo
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
O ganiza ional Jus ice
Figu e 1. Con .
Economies 2025,13, 20 17 o 30
Economies 2025, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 o 32
(c) (d)
(e) ( )
(g) (h)
Figu e 1. Quad a ic and linea effec s o FWO on (a) o ganiza ional suppo , (b) o ganiza ional jus-
ice, (c) commi men , (d) job sa is ac ion, (e) pe o mance, ( ) WFC, (g) FWC and (h) s ess, o in-
pe son and flexible wo ke s. Solid lines e e o in-pe son wo ke effec s and do ed lines e e o
lexible wo ke e ec s. Quad a ic effec s o FWO we e significan only on o ganiza ional suppo ,
o ganiza ional jus ice, o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion exclusi ely o he in-pe son
g oup. Resul s a e p esen ed in a comple ely s anda dized me ic.
6. Discussion
The end o emo e wo k and flexible wo k a angemen s is now s abilizing a lowe
le els han he pandemic peak, bu s ill pe sis s (e.g., Judes e al., 2021; McGahey, 2024),
and schola s and p ac i ione s con inue o p o ide conflic ing a gumen s on he conse-
quences o FW p ac ices and deba e on whe he flexibili y may ha e ad e se a he han
beneficial effec s on employees’ wel a e and p oduc i i y as well as o ganiza ional unc-
ioning. The aim o he p esen s udy was o disen angle he posi i e s. nega i e effec s
o employees’ ai ude owa ds flexible wo k p ac ices (i.e., FWO) on hei le els o job
sa is ac ion, wo k– amily balance, s ess and pe o mance, as well as hei pe cep ions o
o ganiza ional suppo and jus ice and affec i e o ganiza ional commi men . Mo eo e ,
he esea ch examined whe he he hypo hesized cu ilinea effec s in a ian ly apply o
bo h in-pe son and flexible wo ke s o whe he he ype o wo king a angemen may
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
A ec i e Commi men
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
Job Sa is ac ion
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
Pe o mance
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
WFC
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
FWC
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Low FWO High FWO
Pe cie ed S ess
Figu e 1. Quad a ic and linea e ec s o FWO on (a) o ganiza ional suppo , (b) o ganiza ional
jus ice, (c) commi men , (d) job sa is ac ion, (e) pe o mance, ( ) WFC, (g) FWC and (h) s ess, o
in-pe son and lexible wo ke s. Solid lines e e o in-pe son wo ke e ec s and do ed lines e e o
lexible wo ke e ec s. Quad a ic e ec s o FWO we e signi ican only on o ganiza ional suppo ,
o ganiza ional jus ice, o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion exclusi ely o he in-pe son
g oup. Resul s a e p esen ed in a comple ely s anda dized me ic.
6. Discussion
The end o emo e wo k and lexible wo k a angemen s is now s abilizing a lowe
le els han he pandemic peak, bu s ill pe sis s (e.g., Judes e al.,2021;McGahey,2024), and
schola s and p ac i ione s con inue o p o ide con lic ing a gumen s on he consequences
o FW p ac ices and deba e on whe he lexibili y may ha e ad e se a he han bene icial
e ec s on employees’ wel a e and p oduc i i y as well as o ganiza ional unc ioning. The
aim o he p esen s udy was o disen angle he posi i e s. nega i e e ec s o employees’
a i ude owa ds lexible wo k p ac ices (i.e., FWO) on hei le els o job sa is ac ion, wo k–
amily balance, s ess and pe o mance, as well as hei pe cep ions o o ganiza ional
suppo and jus ice and a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men . Mo eo e , he esea ch
examined whe he he hypo hesized cu ilinea e ec s in a ian ly apply o bo h in-pe son
and lexible wo ke s o whe he he ype o wo king a angemen may mode a e he links
Economies 2025,13, 20 18 o 30
among he s udy a iables and u he con ibu e o explaining inconsis en indings when
dealing wi h FW issues.
Ou indings sugges a non-in a ian pa e n o esul s ac oss he wo g oups o in-
pe son and lexible wo ke s and he need o conside di e en se s o indings o he wo
subsamples. Fo he in-pe son wo ke s, in pa ial suppo o he hypo hesized cu ilinea
e ec s, we ound a U-shaped asymp o ic ela ionship be ween FWO and o ganiza ional
suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion. Tha is, he
le els o hese ac o s end o diminish as FWO inc eases and hen u n posi i e, bu only
when FWO eaches e y high le els. As such, employees wo king on-si e epo highe
le els o a ec i e commi men and job sa is ac ion as well as mo e a o able pe cep ions o
o ganiza ional suppo and jus ice only a e y high le els o a posi i e a i ude owa ds
lexibili y (i.e., FWO). Mo eo e , cu ilinea e ec s play a signi ican inc emen al ole in
explaining a iabili y in he da a, hus demons a ing he ele ance and added- alue o
hei con ibu ion. These esul s compo wi h he li e a u e ha wa ns agains he po en ial
downsides o FW o o ganiza ional ac o s such as pe cei ed suppo and ai ness and
employees’ loyal y, as well as wo k sa is ac ion (e.g., Jamaludin & Kamal,2023;Junio
e al.,2020;Soga e al.,2022), while also suppo ing con ibu ions on he bene i s o FW
o o ganiza ional unc ioning and wo ke s’ sa is ac ion (e.g., Scandu a & Lankau,1997;
Za ei e al.,2021). Con e sely, we ound a posi i e linea e ec o FWO on employees’
pe o mance, such ha he mo e on-si e employees a e a o able o FW, he mo e hei
in- ole pe o mance inc eases. In addi ion, we ound a nega i e linea ela ionship be ween
FWO and WFC, FWC and s ess, such ha employees’ posi i e a i ude owa ds FW was
associa ed wi h lowe le els o s ess as well as lowe expe ience o wo k in e e ing wi h
amily (i.e., WFC) and amily in e e ing wi h wo k (i.e., FWC).
Fo he lexible wo ke s, we only ound linea e ec s and no suppo o he hy-
po hesized cu ilinea e ec s. Speci ically, highe le els o FWO p edic ed highe le els
o o ganiza ional suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e commi men , job sa is ac ion,
in- ole pe o mance and lowe le els o s ess, WFC and FWC. Tha is, he mo e lexible
wo ke s had a posi i e a i ude owa ds FW, he mo e hey expe ienced lowe le els o
s ess and wo k–li e con lic issues, he mo e hey we e p oduc i e, and he mo e hey
epo ed o be sa is ied wi h hei job and a ached o hei company as well as epo ed
being ea ed ai ly and suppo ed by he o ganiza ion.
O e all, o lexible wo ke s (bu no o hei on-si e coun e pa s) we may expec a
linea he-mo e-is-be e e ec o FWO on pe cep ions o o ganiza ional suppo and jus ice,
eelings o a ec i e commi men and sa is ac ion wi h one’s job, whe eas on-si e wo ke s
expe ience mo e nuanced and con o e sial e ec s o hei FWO on hese ac o s. These
di e en ial indings o in-pe son and lexible wo ke s seem o compo wi h he li e a u e
sugges ing ha a highe use o FW as expe ienced by lexible wo ke s is associa ed wi h
mo e posi i e ou comes (Albion,2004). No ably, he esul s on linea i y s. cu ilinea i y
o FW e ec s we e also achie ed by con olling o FW policies o , a he , he employees’
possibili y o choose FW a angemen s as opposed o FW imposed on wo ke s by he
employe (Cla k,2001), hus u he con ibu ing o he obus ness o he s udy’s indings.
6.1. Theo e ical Implica ions
Ou indings con ibu e o lexible wo k heo y and he manage ial li e a u e as
well as occupa ional heal h psychology. Fi s , he li e a u e (Soga e al.,2022) sugges s
ha he impac o FW p ac ices is no es ic ed o disc e e a eas bu may span ac oss
di e en domains and le els o o ganiza ional unc ioning. Ou indings add o FW and
he managemen li e a u e by ex ending esea ch on he impac o FW beyond he mo e
commonly s udied ou comes such as wo k–li e balance, p oduc i i y, s ess and sa is ac ion,
Economies 2025,13, 20 19 o 30
while also examining he e ec o employees’ FWO on hei pe cep ion o o ganiza ional
suppo and jus ice as well as a achmen o hei o ganiza ion, he eby shedding ligh on
mo e o ganiza ion- ela ed ac o s.
Second, ou esul s on he cu ilinea e ec s o FWO con ibu e o he ongoing deba e
on he con o e sial consequences o FW, and add o FW heo y by disen angling he
posi i e s. nega i e e ec s o FW on employees’ heal h and p oduc i i y as well as
o ganiza ional unc ioning. Speci ically, ou indings un a el a composi e ame among he
wo k o ce depending on hei on-si e o lexible a angemen . The U-shaped asymp o ic
cu ilinea ela ionship be ween FWO and o ganiza ional suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice,
o ganiza ional commi men and job sa is ac ion o on-si e wo ke s sugges s ha only
in-pe son employees wi h e y posi i e a i udes owa ds FW iew hei o ganiza ion
as suppo i e and ai , and eel a ached o i as well as sa is ied wi h hei job. Tha is,
in-p esence employees who a e ex emely con inced (and ex emely uncon inced, i.e.,
low FWO le els) ha wo king emo ely does no cause being excluded, losing signi ican
e en s o being s igma ized a e hose who a e he mos con iden in hei o ganiza ion (i.e.,
suppo , us ), a ached o i and sa is ied, in compa ison o hei colleagues wi h mode a e
le els o FWO, who show he wo s pe cep ion o and a achmen o hei o ganiza ion. On
he one side, he le -hand sec ion o he U-shaped plo s (i.e., sligh nega i e ela ionship)
compo s wi h a gumen s sugges ing ha FW may ha e nega i e e ec s on employees’
us in o ganiza ional suppo and ai ness (e.g., Bi ,2023;Soga e al.,2022) as well as
loyal y (e.g., Ha e malz & Rieme ,2021) and sa is ac ion (e.g., Mihhailo a e al.,2011;
Za ei e al.,2021). On he o he side, he igh -hand sec ion o he cu e showing a
posi i e ela ionship be ween FW and ou comes is in line wi h esea ch on he posi i e
e ec s o FW o employees’ us in hei o ganiza ion (e.g., Albion,2004) as well as
commi men (e.g., Scandu a & Lankau,1997) and sa is ac ion (e.g., Jamaludin & Kamal,
2023;Wicke sham,2023). A he same ime, lexible employees display a linea ela ionship
among hese a iables such ha he mo e hey ha e a posi i e a i ude owa ds FW, he
mo e hey ha e con idence in and a e a ached o hei o ganiza ion. This compo s wi h he
psychological con ac li e a u e sugges ing ha posi i e ou comes occu when employe s
o e FW op ions and employees eel he need o e u n highe commi men , loyal y and
job pe o mance (Scandu a & Lankau,1997). Fo example, esea ch has ound ha du ing
he COVID-19 ou b eak employees who pe cei ed a lexible wo k a angemen policy as
an o ganiza ional e o o p o ec hem om COVID-19 el he need o e u n a ec i e
commi men , job sa is ac ion and wo k engagemen (Suna yo e al.,2022).
O e all, employe s may ace a composi e wo k o ce si ua ion such ha hei lexible
wo ke s posi i ely o ien ed owa ds FW ha e highe us in and loyal y o hei o gani-
za ion, whe eas hei in-pe son employees who a e bo h nega i e o ex emely posi i e
owa ds FW hold he bes pe cep ion o and a achmen o he o ganiza ion. Indeed, ou
indings also sugges ha o bo h in-pe son and lexible wo ke s, high le els o suppo ,
us , commi men and sa is ac ion a e associa ed wi h employees’ choice o FW. F om
a sys emic pe spec i e, lexibili y o an o ganiza ion does no au oma ically co espond
o lexibili y in e ms o con ol and decision la i ude o employees (e.g., Höge,2011;
Ho nung e al.,2008;Reilly,1998), and he li e a u e sugges s di e en ia ing be ween
lexibili y “demands” and lexibili y “oppo uni ies” in o de o cap u e he po en ial
posi i e o nega i e e ec s o FW on bo h employees and o ganiza ions. As such, FW
imposed on employees may ep esen an addi ional demand om he o ganiza ion, such
as inc eased elewo k among employees wi h ou ine asks (Thulin e al.,2019) mo i a ed
by he employe s’ in e es s in educed cos s, educed absence and e iciency, a he han by
indi idual wo ke s’ own needs and mo i es (López-Igual & Rod íguez-Mod oño,2020).
Ano he ele an dis inc ion is be ween ‘being lexible’ and ‘ha ing lexibili y’ (Jonsson,
Economies 2025,13, 20 20 o 30
2007), whe ein he employe ypically has lexibili y whils he employee has o be lexible.
While he numbe o job pos ings men ioning emo e wo k ipled du ing he pandemic
(Judes e al.,2021) and lexibili y is cu en ly he op eason o candida es accep ing job
o e s (Howle ,2023) leading o a e e sal o he asymme ical powe ela ion be ween
he employe and he employee (Jonsson,2007), he li e a u e sugges s he ele ance o
conside ing employee- iendly lexibili y and “equi lex” FW s a egies designed o mee
he needs o bo h employees and employe s (Albion,2004).
Thi d, we add o occupa ional heal h psychology by showing ha ac oss di e en
occupa ional se ings and indus y sec o s, o bo h in-pe son and lexible wo ke s, we may
expec a he-mo e-is-be e (i.e., linea ) e ec o a posi i e a i ude owa ds FW (FWO) on
s ess, wo k–li e balance and pe o mance, such ha employees wi h a mo e a o able FWO
also end o expe ience less s ess and mo e wo k–li e balance and p oduc i i y. Tha is,
employees who ha e a posi i e a i ude owa ds FW and also expe ience lexibili y because
hey wo k emo ely o hyb idly (i.e., a mix o in-pe son and emo e wo k) end o ha e a
non-con o e sial and s aigh o wa d wo k expe ience associa ed wi h mo e p oduc i i y,
well-being and wo k– amily balance (i.e., lowe s ess, WFC, FWC). In e es ingly, on-
si e wo ke s who do no use lexibili y bu ha e a posi i e FWO end o ha e a simila
s aigh o wa d wo k expe ience associa ed wi h highe p oduc i i y and well-being a
wo k and a home as hei lexible co-wo ke s, bu ha e a mo e con o e sial iew (i.e.,
cu ilinea ) o o ganiza ional ac o s (e.g., o ganiza ional suppo and jus ice).
Ou indings a e in line wi h esea ch on he posi i e e ec s o FW o employees’ wo k–
li e balance (e.g., Bi ,2023;Bonco i,2020;Williams,2008) and s ess (e.g., Wicke sham,
2023;Wige & Whi e,2022). Mo eo e , he posi i e e ec s o FWO on in- ole pe o mance
suppo he li e a u e sugges ing ha FW is associa ed wi h highe p oduc i i y (e.g., De
Sme e al.,2023;Lund e al.,2020). While ou da a a e in line wi h me analy ic indings
sugges ing ha lexible wo k a angemen s can acili a e employees in main aining hei
heal h (Shi in & Michel,2021) and p oduc i i y, hey u he sugges ha hese esul s
apply o bo h on-si e and lexible wo ke s wi h a posi i e o ien a ion owa ds FW. Indeed,
I aly is a coun y commi ed o social wel a e and s ong social secu i y h ough s anda d
ag eemen s be ween employe s and employees (i.e., na ional wo k con ac s) in bo h
public and p i a e o ganiza ions (Con la o o,2022) ha p o ide wo ke s wi h s ong
p o ec ion (Minis y o Economy and Finance,2021). Mo eo e , he I alian Minis y o he
Family (2023) is an ins i u ion dedica ed o de eloping policies aimed a encou aging and
inancing ini ia i es o econcile wo king hou s and amily ca e, and suppo ing ma e ni y
and pa e ni y. Consis en ly, a epo om he O ganiza ion o Economic Coope a ion
and De elopmen (2024) aimed a su eying he membe coun ies wi h ega d o he
quali y o wo k–li e balance sugges s ha in I aly, ull- ime wo ke s de o e 69% o hei
day on a e age (i.e., 16.5 h) o pe sonal ca e (e.g., ea ing, sleeping, e c.) and leisu e (e.g.,
socializing wi h iends and amily, e c.) in compa ison o he a e age 63% o he 38 OECD
membe coun ies (i.e., 15 h), he eby achie ing he bes wo k–li e balance a he global le el.
O e all, esul s om he cu en s udy a e in line wi h he con en ion on he di e en ial
p e alence o FW ac oss di e en coun ies and na ional egula ions (e.g., Eu opean Union,
2020;Johanson,2022).
O e all, he indings o he p esen s udy may help b idge he con ibu ions on
FW a angemen s in he s ill dispa a e ields o lexible wo k heo y and occupa ional
psychology, as well as managemen li e a u e. Fi s , managemen in o ganiza ions should
ake in o conside a ion he ele ance o employees’ di e si y and encou age a cul u e o
di e si y ha may help in blending employees who wo k in di e en wo kspaces and
use di e en wo king me hods. Second, he po en ial posi i e o nega i e e ec s o FW
in e ms o suppo , us , commi men and sa is ac ion on bo h in-pe son and lexible
Economies 2025,13, 20 21 o 30
wo ke s as well as o ganiza ions a e hea ily dependen upon employees’ choice o FW.
O ganiza ions a e ad ised o manage e iciency and lexibili y by using con ol mechanisms
in suppo i e a he han coe ci e ways in o de o p e en unwan ed consequences o
o ce ul con ol such as dec eased employee pe o mance and well-being as well as highe
u no e (Bu ney e al.,2024). Below, we del e in o he p ac ical implica ions o he cu en
indings and include sugges ions o manage ial and sys emic p ac ices.
6.2. P ac ical Implica ions
Ou indings ha e se e al implica ions o p ac ice. Fi s , esul s om he cu en s udy
ac oss di e en occupa ional se ings and indus y sec o s u he co obo a e he idea
ha employees wi h a posi i e a i ude owa ds FW, whe he lexible o on-si e wo ke s,
end o epo be e wo k– amily balance and well-being as well as p oduc i i y. Indeed,
he e e -inc easing adop ion o emo e wo king sugges s ha Eu opean employees do
p e e lexible wo k a angemen s (e.g., wo king emo ely a leas once a week) compa ed
o adi ional o ice wo k (Baumlin e al.,2022). Howe e , he li e a u e sugges s ha he
bene i s associa ed wi h wo kplace lexibili y in e ms o wo k sa is ac ion and amily
well-being end o occu pa icula ly when FW p ac ices esul om policies and wo k
cul u es designed o mee he needs o bo h employees and employe s (Human Righ s and
Equal Oppo uni y Commission; HREOC,1996). Mo eo e , he adop ion o FW models
aises signi ican implica ions o o ganiza ional s uc u es and physical wo kplace designs
as well as wo k o ce well-being (Ben ley e al.,2016;Johnson e al.,2020), and inc eases
he demand o he egula ion o FW gi en i s impac on bo h employe s’ and employees’
igh s (Soga e al.,2022).
A he na ional le el, go e nmen legisla ion on employee-secu e wo k laws and
social sa e y ne s as well as amily suppo and he ma ke iza ion o ca e wo k (Klimczuk
& Klimczuk-Kocha´nska,2016) may help indi iduals manage wo k– amily balance and
p e en he h ea o losing one’s job, pa icula ly o mo e ulne able wo ke s wi h
espec o he unwan ed consequences o lexibili y such as p eca ious and lowe -paid jobs,
pa icula ly o women (López-Igual & Rod íguez-Mod oño,2020). A he o ganiza ional
le el, o ganiza ions a e wa ned ha amily- iendly FW policies a e associa ed wi h lowe
absen eeism and highe job sa is ac ion and dedica ion, especially o women (Galinsky
& S ein,1990;López-Igual & Rod íguez-Mod oño,2020), and, hus, in e en ions may
ange om wo kplace policy de elopmen and o ganiza ional cul u e changes owa d a
s ong cul u e o suppo up o leade ship aining in amily suppo supe iso beha io s
(Hamme e al.,2013).
Indeed, acco ding o he li e a u e (Bu ney e al.,2024), companies can manage e i-
ciency and lexibili y by using con ol mechanisms in bo h coe ci e and suppo i e ways.
Howe e , social exchange heo y holds ha employees su e when o ce ul con ol is
used and coe ci e con ol may esul in dec eased employee pe o mance, well-being
and highe u no e . Speci ically, esea ch shows ha decen aliza ion and in ol emen
in he design o he con ol sys em a e wo s a egies ha o ganiza ions can employ o
lessen he nega i e consequences ela ed o he applica ion o coe ci e con ol. Mo eo e ,
he li e a u e sugges s ha o ganiza ional cul u e is likely mo e impo an han physical
wo kspace o employees’ in ol emen wi h hei o ganiza ion and has a massi e impac
on employee pe o mance and sa is ac ion (Lam e al.,2021). Speci ically, o ganiza ional
cul u e se s he no ms and expec a ions o he o ganiza ion, such as inclusi e p ac ices and
he ai ea men o all ypes o employees (i.e., emo e, hyb id and in p esence) as well
as choice and au onomy (Canning e al.,2020), ha unde pin employees’ a achmen o
hei o ganiza ion and willingness o commi ega dless o hei wo king a angemen (Da-
lessand o & Lo ell,2024). Rega ding me hods o imp o e employees’ con ibu ion, s udies
Economies 2025,13, 20 22 o 30
ha e demons a ed ha manage ial ini ia i es including men o ing p og ams, di e si ying
eams (e.g., sel -managed eams, which allow people in di e en oles and unc ions o wo k
oge he on p ojec s as equals) and leade ship posi ions (e.g., c oss- aining by o a ing
managemen ainees h ough depa men s may inc ease hei con ac wi h di e si y and
deepen hei unde s anding o he whole o ganiza ion) can imp o e equi y and inclusion
leading o e ec i e o ganiza ional ou comes, possibly implemen ing olun a y aining and
a oiding nega i e o h ea ening messages (Dobbin & Kale ,2016). Indeed, exchanges o
posi i e emo ions among employees du ing social in e ac ions a wo k whe he in-p esence
o emo ely may help build a sa e and psychologically heal hy wo k en i onmen (Pe i a
e al.,2021). Fu he mo e, gi ing wo ke s eedom and choice a wo k migh p omo e
a o able esul s (Lo ell e al.,2021) and o ganiza ions a e ad ised o implemen a cul u e
o di e si y, equi y and inclusion a he han concen a ing solely on he wo kplace.
Second, ou da a demons a e a cu ilinea U-shaped asymp o ic ela ionship be ween
FWO and o ganiza ion- ela ed ac o s o on-si e wo ke s (i.e., o ganiza ional suppo ,
jus ice and a ec i e commi men ) such ha hese ac o s u n posi i e a e y high le els
o employees’ FWO, and a linea he-mo e-is-be e e ec o FWO on hese ou comes o
wo ke s al eady using FW op ions. No ably, o bo h in-pe son and lexible wo ke s, he
o ganiza ion’s policy o make FW a ailable upon employee’s choice is associa ed wi h high
le els o suppo , us and commi men . As no ed, employees pe cei e highe p ocedu al
jus ice in hei o ganiza ion when hey ha e a oice du ing he p ocess ha leads o decision
ou comes (Colqui ,2001), such as FW policy design o implemen a ion. Taken oge he ,
ou indings ac oss di e en occupa ional se ings and indus y sec o s co obo a e he
no ion ha lexibili y imposed on wo ke s alls sho in de eloping employees’ posi i e
a i udes (Albion,2004) and wa n o ganiza ions on he ele ance o maximizing FW bene-
i s o wo ke s (e.g., well-being, p oduc i i y) and o ganiza ions (e.g., loyal y, us ) by
in oducing employee-d i en FW p ac ices. On he one hand, o ganiza ions may boos
posi i e o ganiza ional ou comes by s eng hening posi i e psychological con ac s wi h
employees (Albion,2004). Fo example, equi lex FW s a egies (HREOC,1996) designed
o mee he needs o bo h employees and employe s could be implemen ed by o e ing
employees whose job is elewo kable he op ion o choose lexibili y. Rela edly, he li e a-
u e sugges s ha he ac o s ha signi ican ly in luence wo ke s’ use o FW a angemen s
a e no p ima ily conce ns abou inancial and ca ee cos s o he opinion o supe iso s
bu , a he , nega i e a i udes om o he s (e.g., s igma on lexible wo ke s) and he ea o
eeling isola ed and no in ol ed in he wo kplace (Albion,2004). As such, ini ia i es a he
o ganiza ional le el ha ocus on social li e migh also in ol e planning ne wo king e en s
wi h he goal o p omo ing in o mal social li e and educing he nega i e consequences
o wo king emo ely by encou aging social bonding, p oblem-sol ing and/o in o mal
leade ship. An addi ional ool in de eloping a posi i e psychological con ac is lexibili y
implemen ed h ough pe sonal nego ia ion. Fo example, lexibili y has cu en ly become
he op eason o candida es accep ing a job o e and, in e es ingly, in addi ion o sa ing
money, he main eason could be he wo ke ’s con ol and decision la i ude ha allows o
a be e li e balance wi hin wo k and amily domains (A ese h,2024). As such, ec ui e s
may inc ease he likelihood o employee e en ion i hey a e p epa ed o make easonable
and accep able changes ha sui he candida e (Howle ,2023). On he o he hand, FW
p ac ices in ol e he blending o people wo king on-si e and hose wo king emo ely
o lexibly, hus aising he issue o how o de elop a common mindse ha acili a es
widesp ead cohesion and a posi i e psychosocial en i onmen . In e en ion p og ams
may a emp o de elop a cul u e o suppo and lexibili y in he wo kplace (Cla k,2001)
in o de o o e come he ypical ba ie s o he use o FW (e.g., esen men o in-p esence
Economies 2025,13, 20 23 o 30
wo ke s) and p e en he oxic e ec s o non-suppo i e beha io s (Albion,2004;Han &
McLean,2020).
O e all, while measu ing he success o FW a angemen s is challenging due o he
in angible na u e o some o i s key ou comes such as employee mo ale, collabo a ion
and pe o mance, he indi idual- (i.e., pe o mance, job sa is ac ion, s ess, wo k- o- amily
con lic , amily- o-wo k con lic ) and o ganiza ion- ela ed ou comes (i.e., o ganiza ional
social suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men ) es ed in he
cu en s udy s and as key pe o mance indica o s o FW p og ams’ e ec i eness and
p o ide a me ic o hei assessmen . O ganiza ions may u ilize quan i a i e (e.g., su eys)
and quali a i e (e.g., eedback sessions) ools o p oduc i i y and well-being and compa e
hei le els be o e and a e he FW p og ams’ implemen a ion o de e mine he p esence
o a signi ican imp o emen .
6.3. S eng hs, Limi a ions and Fu u e Di ec ions
While ou s udy is an impo an i s s ep a disen angling he posi i e s. nega i e e -
ec s o FW and expanding he esea ch on FW ou comes on he less-s udied o ganiza ional
suppo and jus ice as well as a ec i e commi men , i also has limi a ions ha should
be add essed in u u e esea ch endea o s. Fi s , we es ed ou hypo heses using c oss-
sec ional da a, which aises he possibili y ha common me hod a iance bias is a ec ing
ou obse ed co ela ions (Podsako e al.,2003) and p e en s causal conclusions. Fu u e
s udies may a emp o mi iga e his po en ial bias and cla i y he causal ela ionships
o he sugges ed nomological ne wo k by using c oss-lagged da a wi h longi udinal de-
signs ha in oduce empo al dis ance be ween he p edic o (i.e., FWO) and he p oposed
indi idual- and o ganiza ion- ela ed ou comes. Rela edly, o he pu pose o s eng hening
he assessmen o he cu ilinea e ec s o FW, u u e longi udinal designs may examine
FWO eco ded a Time 1 and indi idual- ela ed ou comes (e.g., s ess, WFC) measu ed a
Time 2, while also including addi ional long- e m heal h ou comes (e.g., physical heal h)
measu ed a Time 3. La en g ow h cu e models applied o h ee-wa e da a allows o
he analysis o wi hin-pe son p ocesses (i.e., employee FWO) and examina ion ia a pa -
allel p ocess model whe he concomi an inc eases o dec eases in employees’ FWO a e
associa ed wi h simila ends in a) indi idual- ela ed wo ke s’ ou comes (e.g., s ess) and
subsequen physical heal h indica o s (Shi in & Michel,2021) and b) o ganiza ion- ela ed
ou comes (e.g., suppo , us ) and subsequen le els o absen eeism and/o o ganiza ional
e ec i eness (e.g., Albion,2004) ac oss ime.
Second, while indi iduals a e he bes in o man s when assessing cons uc s such
as pe cei ed s ess, ou da a using sel - epo measu es may inc ease he likelihood o
common me hod bias. Fu u e s udies should use mul i-sou ce measu es o employee
ou comes, such as supe iso ’s a ings o employees’ pe o mance and heal h eco ds
i a ailable.
Thi d, a no able s eng h o he cu en s udy is he la ge sample size and mul ile el
da a d awn om nume ous o ganiza ions spanning ac oss miscellaneous occupa ional
sec o s as well as public and p i a e se ings. None heless, ou se o da a was a con enience
sample and, hus, ou indings migh be a ec ed by a sel -selec ion bias. As such, u u e
s udies should a emp o include addi ional ypes o occupa ions as well as o ganiza ional
samples om di e se na ional con ex s in o de o inc ease he gene alizabili y o he
p esen indings.
Finally, ou indings on he posi i e e ec s o FWO on employee well-being, p oduc-
i i y and wo k–li e balance ely on da a om one coun y and may a guably be a ec ed by
he na ional-le el con ex ual esou ces a ailable o I alian wo ke s and s ong social sa e y
ne s o I alian wo k laws. Indeed, in o de o de elop success ul equi lex FW p ac ices ha
Economies 2025,13, 20 24 o 30
mee he needs o bo h employe s and employees, esea ch on FW poin s o he ele ance
o a lexibili y- iendly wo kplace cul u e o , a he , o ganiza ional cul u e no ms ha
o e come ba ie s o he use o FW and encou age social suppo among all ele an pa ies
such as cowo ke s and supe iso s (e.g., Cla k,2001). Mo eo e , he p e alence o FW
a angemen s s ongly a ies ac oss di e en coun ies and na ional cul u al no ms ha
may a iously i wi h FW models (Eu opean Union,2020). Fo example, mo e adi ional
cul u es (e.g., ci izens a e ule-based and end o do wha hey a e old) may end o see
mo e nega i e e ec s when implemen ing lexible wo k ha implies employees’ au onomy
and sel -managemen skills (Wilkinson,2017). Consis en ly, u u e esea ch endea o s
could examine how di e en ypes o o ganiza ional cul u e, no ms and alues (Schein,
1985) shape and in luence employees’ FWO and subsequen ou comes, as well as how
na ional cul u al no ms (Ho s ede,1980) a ec he nomological ne wo k examined in he
cu en s udy using c oss-coun y da a om di e en na ional con ex s. An addi ional
ac o di e sely a ec ing equi lex FW implemen a ion ac oss coun ies, and, he e o e,
in luencing he p oposed ou comes (e.g., well-being, loyal y) is employees’ ulne abili y o
i egula i y o income due o lexible wo k schedules o lex- ime con ac s (e.g., Albion,
2004;Kolasa e al.,2021). As such, u u e s udies may ex end he cu en in es iga ion
and examine he ole o economic s ess (i.e., objec i e and subjec i e aspec s o income
and employmen ha may po en ially s ess indi iduals and hei amilies; Voydano ,
1990), which he li e a u e sugges s a ec s o ganiza ional unc ioning (Pe i a e al.,2020),
in de e mining employees’ a i ude owa ds FW (i.e., FWO) and ela ed well-being and
p oduc i i y ou comes.
7. Conclusions
Cumula i e s udies p o ide inconsis en indings on he posi i e s. nega i e conse-
quences o lexible wo king me hods o employees and o ganiza ions. In o de o disen-
angle he exis ing li e a u e’s mixed esul s, he p esen s udy examined he po en ially
cu ilinea e ec s o employees’ a i udes owa ds lexible wo k op ions (i.e., lexible wo k
o ien a ion; FWO) on indi idual- (i.e., pe o mance, job sa is ac ion, s ess, wo k- o- amily
con lic , amily- o-wo k con lic ) and o ganiza ion- ela ed ou comes (i.e., o ganiza ional
social suppo , o ganiza ional jus ice, a ec i e o ganiza ional commi men ). In e es ingly,
ou esul s indica ed ha lexible wo ke s displayed linea ela ionships among all he
s udy a iables, whe eas in-pe son wo ke s showed he cu ilinea U-shaped e ec s o
FWO on suppo , jus ice, commi men and sa is ac ion, all o which inc eased a high le els
o employees’ posi i e a i ude owa ds FWO. O e all, ou esul s sugges he impo ance
o aking in o accoun he po en ial downsides o lexible wo king a angemen s and he
necessi y o o ganize emo e wo k in ligh o employees’ desi es and needs.
T anspa ency and Openness
The a ionale o da a exclusion is epo ed abo e unde he sample desc ip ion. The
co a iance ma ix and analysis code a e a ailable upon eques om he i s au ho . The
aw da a o his s udy a e no a ailable as we do no ha e pe mission om pa icipan s
o aw da a sha ing.
Au ho Con ibu ions: Concep ualiza ion, L.P. and V.G.; me hodology, L.P.; o mal analysis, V.G.;
w i ing—o iginal d a p epa a ion, L.P.; w i ing— e iew and edi ing, L.P. and V.G.; unding acquisi-
ion, L.P. All au ho s ha e ead and ag eed o he published e sion o he manusc ip .
Funding: This s udy was pa ially unded by a esea ch g an om Sapienza Uni e si y o Rome
(p o . RP120172B962500C —2020) o he 1 h au ho .
