Development and Initial Validation of a Scale to Measure Cognitive Demands of Flexible Work

A field experiment on the effects of weekly planning behaviour on work engagement, unfinished tasks, rumination, and cognitive flexibility

This study concerns research on self-regulation. It examines the effects of planning behaviour, a comprehensive self-regulatory strategy of goal setting, planning work steps, and developing alternative plans. Combining different strategies, rather than testing them in isolation, would strengthen their effects and make them more appropriate for complex work tasks. Drawing on self-regulation theory, we propose that planning behaviour positively affects work engagement, unfinished tasks, rumination, and cognitive flexibility. Considering cognitive flexibility as an outcome provides insight into the cognitive benefits of planning behaviour. We examine person-level cognitive demands of flexible work and predictability as moderator variables to better understand the role of contextual variables in the use of self-regulatory strategies at work. We conducted a field experiment (N = 208 individuals; 947 weekly entries) in which we manipulated employees' weekly planning behaviour in their daily work lives. We found negative effects on unfinished tasks and weekly rumination, and positive effects on weekly cognitive flexibility. No significant moderating effects were found. Our study suggests that a brief planning manipulation at the beginning of the week may have multiple benefits and may be an important tool for improving cognitive flexibility. Future research should examine the role of time and mediating variables.

A two-wave study on the effects of cognitive demands of flexible work on cognitive flexibility, work engagement and fatigue

Cognitive demands of flexible work are the specific cognitive demands of planning of working times, planning of working places, structuring of work tasks and coordinating with others that arise from flexible work organisation. Although these demands have become increasingly widespread, their consequences are not well understood. We propose that cognitive demands of flexible work are challenge stressors that can benefit employees, by adding to their cognitive flexibility and work engagement, but also impair employees by causing fatigue. Hypotheses were tested using a two-wave study design in a sample that recently switched to a more flexible work organisation (N = 279). Data were analysed using structural equation modelling. We found that planning of working times and planning of working places were related to increases in cognitive flexibility, and coordinating with others was related to increases in work engagement. No significant relations with fatigue were found. Thus, the results suggest that cognitive demands of flexible work helped employees to personally develop and feel motivated at work. However, effects on work engagement were rather small. Future research should control potential confounding variables more thoroughly and examine effects on short-term strain outcomes.

Development and validation of a scale to measure team communication behaviors

Introduction

With the COVID-19 pandemic, remote work was increased all over the globe. As a consequence, workers had to adapt their communication behaviors to smoothly coordinate work in their flexible teams (i.e., when team members divide work between the office and their homes). Drawing on relational coordination theory, we constructed and validated a scale to capture the most relevant team communication behaviors.

Methods

We employed interviews and focus groups to construct the scale, refined the scale based on three samples with employees working flexibly and finally validated the scale with 130 teams from diverse organizations.

Results

Our scale comprises three dimensions: focused communication, knowledge sharing and spontaneous communication. All three dimensions showed convergent validity with team planning and discriminant validity with time-spatial flexibility. Also, predictive validity with collective efficacy and team viability was achieved for focused communication and knowledge sharing. Spontaneous communication only predicted collective efficacy, but not team viability.

Discussion

We conclude that the TCS is a reliable and valid measure for assessing team communication and contribute by focusing on behaviors.