1017849

research-article2021
ADHXXX10.1177/15234223211017849Advances in Developing Human ResourcesPark et al.

Article
Advances in Developing Human

Remote e-Workers’
Resources
1­–15
© The Author(s) 2021
Psychological Well-being Article reuse guidelines:
[Link]/journals-permissions
and Career Development DOI: 10.1177/15234223211017849
[Link]
[Link]/home/adh
in the Era of COVID-19:
Challenges, Success
Factors, and the Roles
of HRD Professionals

Sunyoung Park, Shinhee Jeong,

and Dae Seok Chai

Abstract
The Problem.
As most employees have been forced to work from home during the COVID-19
pandemic, there is considerable concern about how to preserve employee health
and well-being by supporting their work in this unpredictable situation. In this
sense, research highlighting how to support remote e-workers in the COVID-19
pandemic era is urgently needed to inform scholars and practitioners about effective
strategies and interventions to support remote e-workers.
The Solution.
By reviewing conceptual and empirical studies, we discuss the challenges of remote
e-workers from the perspective of psychological well-being. We also summarize the
factors that support psychological well-being. Based on the findings, we suggest how
human resource development (HRD) professionals can support remote e-workers’
psychological well-being and career development in the COVID-19 pandemic era.
The Stakeholders.
This article has relevance for scholars, scholar-practitioners, and practitioners who
are interested in seeking ways to support remote e-workers from an HRD perspective
across countries, disciplines, and contexts in the COVID-19 pandemic era.

1
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, USA
2
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA

Corresponding Author:
Sunyoung Park, School of Leadership and Human Resource Development, Louisiana State University,
591 Coates Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803-2804, USA.
Email: spark65@[Link]
2 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

Keywords
remote e-work, psychological well-being, career development, HRD professionals

The COVID-19 outbreak has rapidly changed the landscape of work including where
people work. According to Gallup, about 69% of employees in the U.S. switched to
always or sometimes work remotely in April 2020 (Brenan, 2020). To slow the spread
of the virus and maintain social distancing, more organizations have allowed their
employees to work from home, and it is expected that they will continue or even
expand the extent of the remote work arrangement. For example, Microsoft and Twitter
announced that their employees can continue working from home permanently, and
Facebook plans to allow half of the company to permanently work remotely over the
next 5 to 10 years. Even prior to the pandemic, between 2005 and 2017, there was a
159% increase in remote work (Hering, 2020). Given that many organizations have
increasingly embraced the concept of working from home, researchers have paid con-
siderable attention to remote e-workers and their well-being.
The psychological well-being of employees is an essential aspect of managing
human resources in any organization. The construct denotes the overall quality of
employees’ experiences and functioning at work (Grant et al., 2007). Employee well-
being plays an important role in building a positive relationship between individuals
and organizations. Studies have suggested that employees with a high level of well-
being tend to have a high level of organizational commitment (Jain et al., 2009), are
less likely to be absent from the work, and have a low level of turnover intention
(Harter et al., 2002).
Considering the rapidly growing population of remote e-workers and the importance
of their well-being, pressure on human resource (HR) practitioners to develop and sup-
port the well-being of remote e-workers has also grown. Although it is well known that
remote e-working has some beneficial aspects such as increased temporal flexibility
(Evans et al., 2004), autonomy, productivity (Dimitrova, 2003), and flexibility (Kelliher
& Anderson, 2010), several scholars have also noted that remote e-working can poten-
tially threaten employee well-being. For example, remote e-workers can suffer from
physical and temporal separation (Lautsch et al., 2009), social isolation and limited
social support (Golden et al., 2008), blurred boundaries between work and home life
(Grant et al., 2013), and long work hours (Grant et al., 2013; Song & Gao, 2019). These
factors could deteriorate employee engagement and well-being. Remote e-workers also
tend to worry about their career development and advancement because of decreased
visibility and opportunities in organizations (Campbell et al., 2016).
To effectively facilitate remote e-workers’ success, it is crucial to understand their
challenges and influencing factors that affect their well-being. A substantial number of
studies have responded to the increasing calls for research from both academia and
practice on this growing population. However, scholarly attempts to collate their find-
ings are scarce, particularly since it is a relatively new phenomenon. Hence, this study
aims to synthesize the current body of literature on remote e-workers, focusing on
studies that have discussed the factors or conditions influencing these workers’ psy-
chological well-being. This review is guided by the following research questions:
Park et al. 3

(1) What challenges have been discussed in the context of remote e-work regard-
ing psychological well-being?
(2) What factors or conditions supporting remote e-workers’ psychological well-
being have been discussed?
(3) How can HRD professionals support remote e-workers’ psychological well-
being and career development?

To answer these research questions, we reviewed 20 peer-reviewed empirical and

non-empirical studies and book chapters. If these studies have any quantitative por-
tions, we only included related factors along with statistical significance. Scholarly
studies were found using multiple databases, including Academic Search Complete,
Business Source Complete, and Google Scholar. In our search, key terms and mixed
terms were used, including “remote e-work(er),” “remote e-working,” “telework,”
”psychological well-being,” and “career development,” in the title or keywords. The
search focused on multidisciplinary fields, including business, human resource devel-
opment (HRD), management, organization studies, psychology, and sociology.

What is Remote E-work?

Remote e-work generally refers to “work being completed anywhere and at any time
regardless of location and to the widening use of technology to aid flexible working
practices” (Grant et al., 2013, p. 3). Several similar terms have been used such as home-
working, distributed work, telework, telecommuting, mobile work, working-from-
home, and work-from-anywhere. Although these terms are often used interchangeable,
they denote different forms of electronic outworking. For example, work-from-home
refers to working remotely from the worker’s own home often located within commut-
ing distance of the work while work-from-anywhere does not require employees to
reside within a commuting distance from the work and allows more flexibility to choose
where they want to live (Choudhury et al., 2021). In the United States, “telework” is the
most commonly used term while European countries use the term “e-work”
(Charalampous et al., 2019). It is also important to note that teleworkers can be full-
time or part-time homeworkers or self-employed workers, which is one of the criti-
cisms that these terms are poorly defined (Tremblay, 2003). Remote e-work is a broader
umbrella term as it implies that workers engage in work away from the traditional office
through information and communications technology. Thus, we use “remote e-work” in
the current study to encompass the broad group of workers who take advantage of the
technology to work outside a traditional office setting.

Challenges that Threaten Remote E-workers’

Psychological Well-being
Although the benefits of remote e-work such as less work stress and increased produc-
tivity and morale have been largely published by the business press, scholars recom-
mend accepting these reports with caution (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). They have
suggested caveats since the findings of these studies have been inconsistent or
4 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

contradictory and, sometimes, have been conducted based on weak methodologies or

unconvincing theories. A substantial amount of research has also reported negative
impacts of remote e-work that could potentially harm employee psychological well-
being. As a result, no conclusion or consensus has been reached on whether remote
e-work is good or bad. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to synthesize
the findings with a focus on the challenges remote e-workers face.
The context of remote e-work introduces unique challenges for employees’ psycho-
logical well-being. Psychological well-being refers to individuals’ self-evaluation of
their affective states and positive feelings and emotions such as job/life satisfaction,
self-realization, and happiness (Loon et al., 2019). Studies have found that psychologi-
cal well-being is positively related to work-life balance (Jang, 2009), employee com-
munication, social support (Daniels & Guppy, 1994), adequate working hours and
workload (Bliese & Halverson, 1996) and a supportive organizational climate (Kim
et al., 2018). However, these antecedents of psychological well-being seem to be
mostly absent in the context of remote e-work settings.
With the widespread use of information and computer technologies such as smart
phones and the globalized work environment, most remote e-workers are expected to
be responsive to work-related calls and issues within or beyond traditional working
hours (Kossek et al., 2009), represented as “always on culture” (Derks et al., 2015, p.
170). The expectations often lead them to overwork or working long hours for remote
e-workers. As a result, it has been reported that some remote e-workers exhibit char-
acteristics of workaholism (Olson & Primps, 1984). Remote e-working also often col-
lapses and blurs the boundaries between work and personal lives and thus has adverse
effects on employee well-being (Grant et al., 2013; Hill et al., 1998). As such, Hartman
et al. (1991) demonstrated that satisfaction with telework is negatively associated with
family relationships.
In the context of remote e-work, it is uneasy to build a network with co-workers,
feel the sense of camaraderie, or detect social cues (Grant et al., 2013). The primary
tools for interactions and communications among remote e-workers include phones,
emails, instant messengers, and conference calls. As remote e-workers do not have
much face-to-face interactions, and their communications with colleagues are low in
frequency and richness, they often suffer from a social isolation (Hill et al., 1998).
They feel less connected to their organizations and excluded in decision-making pro-
cesses (Virick et al., 2010). Moreover, “out of sight, out of mind” mentality can ham-
per the quality of interpersonal relationships in the context of remote e-work. This may
lead to limited access to social support such as mentoring and informal learning, which
can possibly cause an individual career stagnation and professional development
(Cooper & Kurland, 2002; Smith et al., 2018).
Scholars have also indicated that career development-related issues are a concern
for remote e-workers (Campbell et al., 2016; Golden & Eddleston, 2020). Some stud-
ies have reported that remote e-working is a barrier to career progress and success
because it could negatively affect their career growth including limited opportunities
for career development and promotions, and reducing workplace presence (Golden &
Eddleston, 2020). Specifically in the COVID-19 pandemic era, employees working
Park et al. 5

from home may perceive that their career advancement and development could be
restricted because of limited opportunities to demonstrate excellent skills or work
results (Raišienė et al., 2020).

Factors Supporting Remote E-workers’ Psychological

Well-being
In this section, we identify various factors influencing remote e-workers’ psycho-
logical well-being at the individual (10 factors), group (13), job (7), and organiza-
tional (7) levels—a total of 37 factors. Table 1 summarizes the critical factors at each
of the four levels.
Factors influencing remote e-workers’ psychological well-being at the individ-
ual, listed in Table 1, are related to personal traits and experience. For example,
individual competences (e.g., knowledge, skills, and abilities) play an important
role in how effectively they work in remote environments (Charalampous et al.,
2019; Grant et al., 2013). When remote e-workers perceive themselves as more
competent, they are more likely to concentrate on their work, have higher self-
efficacy, demonstrate better structured behaviors, and easily adjust to changes in
their work (Charalampous et al., 2019). This awareness can help remote e-workers
improve their psychological well-being as they reach their goals (Fu et al., 2018).
While working from home, remote e-workers’ emotional experiences can also
affect their psychological well-being based on how connected they feel with their
colleagues and workplace and how engaged they are in family work (Anderson
et al., 2015; Charalampous et al., 2019). Remote e-workers’ psychological well-
being tended to increase when they indicated a higher occupational calling, open-
ness to experience, rumination, sensation seeking, and social connections outside
of work (Anderson et al., 2015; Kim & Kang, 2020).
Second, the level of group characteristics is the most dominant factors affecting
employees’ psychological well-being. They emphasize communication, social
relationships, and support from colleagues and supervisors. For remote e-workers,
communication with colleagues and supervisors plays a critical role in psychologi-
cal well-being by sharing information and work processes, identifying problems
and implementing solutions, and building relationships in work groups (Crawford
et al., 2011; Nayani et al., 2018). When remote e-workers have more opportunities
to develop and maintain social relationships with colleagues and managers, they
have higher levels of psychological well-being because they are less likely to feel
excluded from the workplace (Johnson et al., 2020). Support from colleagues and
supervisors can help remote e-workers perceive psychological well-being by
allowing them to seek advice from co-workers and managers and to link to work
groups (Nayani et al., 2018). In addition, remote e-workers are more likely to have
higher psychological well-being when they have a strong sense of belonging to
work groups, teamwork, and trust in colleagues and supervisors, and they feel that
their work groups and managers care about them (Mota et al., 2018; Prasad et al.,
2020).
6 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

Table 1. Summary of Supportive Factors on Remote e-Workers’ Psychological Well-being.

Individual (10)* Group (13)* Job (7)* Organizational (7)*

Competence A sense of belonging Autonomy Organizational climate
(knowledge, skills, Building/maintaining/ Clear roles Organizational policies
and abilities) trusting relationships Control of work pace Organizational support
Concentration Caring Flexible working for career development
Emotional Communication practices and opportunities
intelligence More opportunities to Job satisfaction Performance
Emotional stability develop relationships Task characteristics management
Occupational calling Level of interaction Technological tools Safety climate
Openness to with colleagues and resources to Supportive systems,
experience Social engagement support work practices, and
Rumination Social relationship procedures
Self-efficacy Social support Training
Sensation seeking Support from
Social connections colleagues
outside of work Support from
managers
Teamwork
Trust

*Parenthesis (frequency).

Next, influential factors on psychological well-being at the job level are linked to
job demands (e.g., role, stress, and workload), job control (e.g., autonomy, control of
work pace, and flexible working practices), and job support (e.g., tools and resources
to support work). In remote e-working environments, employees tend to have higher
levels of psychological well-being when their role is clear or not conflicted, they feel
less job stress, and they have less workload (Crawford et al., 2011; Grant et al., 2013;
Park et al., 2016; Song & Gao, 2019). These studies also found that the more auton-
omy, control, freedom, and flexibility remote e-workers have in their work and prac-
tices, the greater psychological well-being they experience (Charalampous et al.,
2019; Johnson et al., 2020; Perry et al., 2018). In relation to job support, available
resources and technological tools can also help remote workers experience a higher
level of psychological well-being by supporting their work and communication under
both synchronous and asynchronous conditions (Nayani et al., 2018).
Finally, critical factors for psychological well-being at the organizational level
include organizational climate, organizational support, and organizational practices.
A positive and safe organizational climate can enhance remote e-workers’ psycho-
logical well-being by facilitating consensus on common values among employees
and ensuring good occupational safety and health (Nayani et al., 2018; Prasad et al.,
2020). Organizations can also promote remote e-workers’ psychological well-being
by establishing appropriate policies, procedures, and performance management sys-
tems to support employees working remotely (Beauregard et al., 2019; Nayani et al.,
2018). From a career development perspective, when an organization gives remote
Park et al. 7

e-workers more support and opportunities for career development and training, it
helps them decrease psychological strain and reduce feelings of social isolation, and
ultimately, it builds stronger psychological well-being (Bentley et al., 2016;
Charalampous et al., 2019).

Remote e-Workers’ Psychological Well-being and Career

Development
Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) can describe the link between remote e-work-
ers’ psychological well-being and their career development. Since SCCT was initially
introduced by Lent et al. (1994), SCCT has been popularly used as a theoretical frame-
work for career-related behavior and career development (Lent & Brown, 2019;
Liguori et al., 2018; Sheu et al., 2010). Based on Bandura’s (1989) social cognitive
theory, SCCT assumes that (a) individuals have own capacity and cognitive ability to
understand their development and environments and (b) according to their behavior
and its outcomes, individuals can adjust and change their cognitive ability and under-
standing of external environments, which will affect subsequent behavior (Bandura,
1989; Liguori et al., 2018). Accordingly, SSCT highlights the important role of per-
sonal (e.g., self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and personal goals) and con-
textual (e.g., environment and support) factors affecting career-related behavior by
emphasizing the process of developing individual career interest, career choice, and
career success and their interactions for career development (Lent et al., 1994).
From this perspective, remote e-workers’ psychological well-being can be viewed
as one critical component that influences their career decision (e.g., if they would
maintain their current career and job in remote environments) affected by personal
and contextual factors described in SCCT. Personal factors are related to individual
characteristics while contextual factors include group, job, and organizational char-
acteristics in Table 1. If remote e-workers have higher levels of self-efficacy and
competence, receive strong social support from colleagues, managers, and organiza-
tions, recognize how their work is aligned with organizational goals and outcomes,
and can be more autonomous and flexible in their job, their psychological well-
being can be enhanced, which affect their career decision to maintain and expand the
current career in a positive way.
From HRD perspectives, SCCT can contribute to expanding scholarly discussion
about career development and related topics such as career adaptability, career suc-
cess, and employment (e.g., Thompson et al., 2017; Wong & Mohd Rasdi, 2019). For
instance, remote workers’ attitudes toward work could impact their ability to exhibit
motivation and self-efficacy when they do job searching, which will affect their
career adaptability in the reemployment process (Thompson et al., 2017). In this case,
HRD scholars can adopt SCCT to explain this process and provide suggestions to
support both remote workers and organizations in terms of career development.
Additionally, SCCT could help researchers explore how personal and contextual
antecedents interact with each other in the process of affecting remote workers’ career
development.
8 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

The Role of HRD Professionals to Support

Remote e-Workers’ Psychological Well-being and Career
Development
The COVID-19 pandemic has critically impacted job markets across the globe.
While many workers have suddenly and unexpectedly become unemployed (OECD,
2020), others have had to adjust to the “new normal” of remote e-working (Autin
et al., 2020). As we previously identified, these remote e-working changes have led
to significant challenges for employees, such as low wages, low job security, few
social connections, and little work-life balance (Autin et al., 2020). These challenges
may negatively impact the mental health of remote e-workers (e.g., anxiety, depres-
sion, and low self-esteem), which is significantly related to their psychological well-
being and impacts their careers. Our review revealed several factors enhancing the
level of remote e-workers’ psychological well-being, but these influencers are inter-
related at various levels. According to SCCT, HRD professionals can identify their
critical role in helping enhance remote e-workers’ psychological well-being and
develop their careers.
At the individual level, HRD professionals can design opportunities for remote
e-workers to develop critical characteristics and competence in the COVID-19 era.
For example, a level of psychological well-being is enhanced by openness to experi-
ence (McCrae & Costa, 2003), resilience/rumination and self-efficacy (Anderson
et al., 2015; Hite & McDonald, 2020), and knowledge and skills to improve remote
e-workers’ outcomes. In particular, meta-competence (e.g., how to learn quickly in an
unfamiliar context) will be necessary in their “new normal” context (Heslin et al.,
2020). HRD professionals can design and deliver interventions to develop these per-
sonal characteristics and individual competencies to help remote e-workers not only
immediately enhance their psychological well-being but also help their career decision
to maintain and expand their career in a positive way during and after COVID-19.
SCCT can be a theoretical tool to help HRD professionals justify the reasons why dif-
ferent inventions should be developed for individuals’ career-related decision to sup-
port their strengths and characteristics in remote work contexts.
At the group level, social connections and support include most of the influencers
to psychological well-being. In addition, since these social connections and support
can inform the values of the works of remote e-workers and improve their outcomes,
they can also significantly affect remote e-workers’ career development based on
SCCT. HRD professionals can provide various programs to boost social connections
and support by promoting virtual informal and social connections (e.g., celebration of
a team member’s birthday or work anniversary together, happy hour) and developing
a “good news” channel using social networking services or chat rooms. More impor-
tantly, a manager needs to make it clear how remote e-workers’ individual goals/tasks
are related to organizational goals, which is significantly related to the workers’ career
development. To make these social meetings and channels more sustainable, it would
be efficient to make a key performance indicator of a manger of the team the level of
social connection and support within the team.
Park et al. 9

The job and organizational levels can be considered together because of their rela-
tionships. Since autonomy and clearer job processes/expectations (i.e., keys at the job
level) are significantly related to organizational culture at the organizational level,
HRD professionals need to focus on interventions at the organizational level while
also considering these influencers at the job level. Influencers (e.g., adjustment in HR
policy, organizational culture change) at the organizational level are critically related
to influencers at other levels. HRD professionals need to develop an organizational
supportive structure and culture by collaborating with HRM professionals. Since
employees may have additional physical/mental needs and perceive a lower level of
job security, it is important to recognize how remote e-workers have experienced this
crisis differently, to identify what they may need to return to work and be successful,
and to provide adequate resources. When employees have a preferred working envi-
ronment and the necessary support to satisfy their basic needs, they can fully engage
in their work (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Related to individual-level influencers, an
organization-wide e-mentoring program (Chong et al., 2020) could help remote
e-workers’ discuss their careers and competence since mentors are more informative
about possible careers and necessary competence. For employees with mental health
issues, HRD professionals can advocate for accessible mental health services or
resources for remote e-workers, including training managers to be more aware of men-
tal health challenges and providing information for employees on how to access ser-
vices and resources.
More importantly, the organizational culture and policies need to be developed to
meet the needs of vulnerable populations in the organization, such as minorities
(e.g., ethnic, social-economic status) and single parents, since their needs may be
different from and more intense than others. HRD professionals can also be advo-
cates for developing a more humane organizational culture by fostering a greater
sense of altruism, empathy, and prosocial values to enhance remote e-workers’ psy-
chological well-being (Hite & McDonald, 2000). In relation to connections between
theory and practice, SCCT can provide a theoretical lens for HRD professional to
reconstruct and adopt contextual factors (i.e., group, job, and/or organizational-
related factors) to support employees’ career-related behavior by stimulating their
individual interest and motivation.

Conclusion
Crises are not only a risk to the status quo of an organization, but they also present
opportunities for change (Brockner & James, 2008). In this time of uncertainty, how
organizations and individual remote e-workers perceive the influence of COVID-19
will shape their future perspectives. The current review explored the changes in
remote e-working due to COVID-19, various challenges employees face, the impact
of the challenges on remote e-workers’ psychological well-being, influencers for
psychological well-being, and the roles of HRD professionals. We also highlighted
the positive side of COVID-19, including promoting the fourth industrial revolution
through information and communication technology. We believe that HRD can take
10 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

this opportunity to play a critical role in helping organizations and individuals learn
from the experience, develop together, manage risks, and build a more sustainable
career culture.
For future research, we recommend expanding the theoretical discussion of remote
e-working through more integrative and broader reviews. Exploring negative factors
related to remote e-workers’ psychological well-being (e.g., social isolation and Zoom
fatigue) can help researchers combine our findings and suggest conceptual and theo-
retical models for further empirical research. Career development of remote e-workers
could also be discussed in detail in terms of well-being and post-COVID-19 perspec-
tives. Scholars could examine how specific interventions (e.g., e-mentoring and
e-coaching) can work more effectively for this unique population’s psychological
well-being. Another research topic could be how national culture affects remote
e-workers’ psychological well-being in different countries and for multinational teams.
For example, are remote e-workers affected differently in collectivist cultures com-
pared to individualistic cultures? Finally, future studies could explore how remote
e-working contexts interact with individual, group, job, and organizational aspects to
better understand remote e-workers’ psychological well-being.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

References
Anderson, A. J., Kaplan, S. A., & Vega, R. P. (2015). The impact of telework on emotional
experience: When, and for whom, does telework improve daily affective well-being?
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(6), 882–897. [Link]
/10.1080/1359432X.2014.966086
Autin, K. L., Blustein, D. L., Ali, S. R., & Garriott, P. O. (2020). Career development impacts of
COVID-19: Practice and policy recommendations. Journal of Career Development, 47(5),
487–494. [Link]
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal
of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. [Link]
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9),
1175–1184. [Link]
Beauregard, T. A., Basile, K. A., & Canónico, E. (2019). Telework: Outcomes and facilita-
tors for employees. In R. N. Landers (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of technology and
employee behavior (pp. 511–543). Cambridge University Press.
Bentley, T. A., Teo, S. T. T., McLeod, L., Tan, F., Bosua, R., & Gloet, M. (2016). The role
of organisational support in teleworker well-being: A socio-technical systems approach.
Applied Ergonomics, 52, 207–215. [Link]
Park et al. 11

Bliese, P. D., & Halverson, R. R. (1996). Individual and nomothetic models of job stress: An
examination of work hours, cohesion, and well-being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
26(13), 1171–1189. [Link]
Brenan, M. (2020, October 13). COVID-19 and remote work: An update. Gallup. [Link]
[Link]/poll/321800/[Link]#:~:text=Currently%2C%20
33%25%20are%20always%20working,31%25%20were%20never%20working%20
remotely
Brockner, J., & James, E. H. (2008). Toward an understanding of when executives see cri-
sis as opportunity. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(1), 94–115. [Link]
org/10.1177/0021886307313824
Campbell, N., Eley, D. S., & McAllister, L. (2016). How do allied health professionals construe
the role of the remote workforce? New insight into their recruitment and retention. PloS
One, 11(12), e0167256. [Link]
Charalampous, M., Grant, C., Tramontano, C., & Michailidis, E. (2019). Systematically
reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: A multidimensional approach. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(1), 51–73. [Link]
59432X.2018.1541886
Chong, J. Y., Ching, A. H., Renganathan, Y., Lim, W. Q., Toh, Y. P., Mason, S., & Krishna, L.
K. R. (2020). Enhancing mentoring experiences through e-mentoring: A systematic scop-
ing review of e-mentoring programs between 2000 and 2017. Advances in Health Science
Education, 25, 195–226. [Link]
Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. Z. (2021). Work-from-anywhere: The productivity
effects of geographic flexibility. Strategic Management Journal, 42(4), 655–683. https://
[Link]/10.1002/smj.3251
Cooper, C., & Kurland, N. (2002). Telecommuting, professional isolation, and employee devel-
opment in public and private organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 511–
532. [Link]
Crawford, J. O., MacCalman, L., & Jackson, C. A. (2011). The health and well-being of remote
and mobile workers. Occupational Medicine, 61(6), 385–394. [Link]
med/kqr071
Daniels, K., & Guppy, A. (1994). Occupational stress, social support, job control,
and psychological well-being. Human Relations, 47(12), 1523–1544. [Link]
org/10.1177/001872679404701205
Derks, D., Duin, D., Tims, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2015). Smartphone use and work–home inter-
ference: The moderating role of social norms and employee work engagement. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(1), 155–177. [Link]
joop.12083
Dimitrova, D. (2003). Controlling teleworkers: Supervision and flexibility revisited. New
Technology, Work and Employment, 18(3), 181–195. [Link]
005X.00120
Evans, J. A., Kunda, G., & Barley, S. R. (2004). Beach time, bridge time, and billable hours:
The temporal structure of technical contracting. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(1),
1–38. [Link]
Fu, F., Liang, Y., An, Y., & Zhao, F. (2018). Self-efficacy and psychological well-being
of nursing home residents in China: The mediating role of social engagement. Asia
Pacific Journal of Social Work, 28(2), 128–140. [Link]
018.1464942
12 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecom-
muting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524–1541. [Link]
Golden, T. D., & Eddleston, K. A. (2020). Is there a price telecommuters pay? Examining the
relationship between telecommuting and objective career success. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 116(Part A), 103348. [Link]
Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The impact of professional isolation on tele-
worker job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting
face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? Journal of
Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1412–1421. [Link]
Grant, A. M., Christianson, M. K., & Price, R. (2007). Happiness, health, or relationships?
Managerial practices and employee well-being tradeoffs. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 21(3), 51–63. [Link]
Grant, C. A., Wallace, L. M., & Spurgeon, P. C. (2013). An exploration of the psychological
factors affecting remote e-worker’s job effectiveness, well-being and work-life balance.
Employee Relations, 35(5), 527–546. [Link]
Hartman, R. I., Stoner, C. R., & Arora, R. (1991). An investigation of selected variables affect-
ing telecommuting productivity and satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 6(2),
207–225
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between
employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279. [Link]
Hering, B. (2020). Remote work statistics: Shifting norms and expectations. [Link]
[Link]/blog/post/remote-work-statistics/
Heslin, P. A., Keating, L. A., & Ashford, S. J. (2020). How being in learning mode may enable
a sustainable career across the lifespan. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 117, 1–17. https://
[Link]/10.1016/[Link].2019.103324
Hill, E. J., Miller, B. C., Weiner, S. P., & Colihan, J. (1998). Influences of the virtual office on
aspects of work and work/life balance. Personnel Psychology, 51(3), 667–683. [Link]
org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00256.x
Hite, L. M., & McDonald, K. S. (2000). A new era for career development and HRD. Advances
in Developing Human Resources, 10(1), 3–7.
Hite, L. M., & McDonald, K. S. (2020). Careers after COVID-19: Challenges and changes.
Human Resource Development International, 23(4), 427–437. [Link]
678868.2020.1779576
Jain, A. K., Giga, S. I., & Cooper, C. L. (2009). Employee well-being, control and organi-
zational commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(3), 256–273.
[Link]
Jang, S. J. (2009). The relationships of flexible work schedules, workplace support, supervi-
sory support, work-life balance, and the well-being of working parents. Journal of Social
Service Research, 35(2), 93–104. [Link]
Johnson, A., Dey, S., Nguyen, H., & Groth, M. (2020). A review and agenda for examin-
ing how technology-driven changes at work will impact workplace mental health and
employee well-being. Australian Journal of Management, 45(3), 402–424. [Link]
org/10.1177/0312896220922292
Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Doing more with less? Flexible working prac-
tices and the intensification of work. Human Relations, 63(1), 83–106. [Link]
org/10.1177/0018726709349199
Park et al. 13

Kim, M., Kim, A. C. H., Newman, J. I., Ferris, G. R., & Perrewé, P. L. (2019). The antecedents
and consequences of positive organizational behavior: The role of psychological capital for
promoting employee well-being in sport organizations. Sport Management Review, 22(1),
108–125. [Link]
Kim, Y. J., & Kang, S. W. (2020). The quality of life, psychological health, and occupational
calling of Korean workers: Differences by the new classes of occupation emerging amid
the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 17(16), 5689. [Link]
Kossek, E. E., Lautsch, B. A., & Eaton, S. C. (2009). “Good Teleworking”: Under what
conditions does teleworking enhance employees’ well-being. In Y. Amichai-Hamburger
(Ed.), Technology and psychological well-being (pp. 148–173). Cambridge University
Press.
Lautsch, B. A., Kossek, E. E., & Eaton, S. C. (2009). Supervisory approaches and paradoxes in
managing telecommuting implementation. Human Relations, 62(6), 795–827. [Link]
org/10.1177/0018726709104543
Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2019). Social cognitive career theory at 25: Empirical status of the
interest, choice, and performance models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 103316.
[Link]
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of
career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
45(1), 79–122. [Link]
Liguori, E. W., Bendickson, J. S., & McDowell, W. C. (2018). Revisiting entrepreneurial
intentions: A social cognitive career theory approach. International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal, 14, 67–78. [Link]
Loon, M., Otaye-Ebede, L., & Stewart, J. (2019). The paradox of employee psychological
well-being practices: An integrative literature review and new directions for research. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(1), 156–187. [Link]
.1080/09585192.2018.1479877
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective
(2nd ed.). Guildford Press.
Mota, N. P., Medved, M., Hiebert-Murphy, D., Whitney, D., & Sareen, J. (2018). Negotiating
home base: Narratives of psychological well-being among female military members.
Health & Place, 50, 105–111. [Link]
Nayani, R. J., Nielsen, K., Daniels, K., Feilder, E. J., & Lewis, R. C. (2018). Out of sight and
out of mind? A literature review of occupational safety and health leadership and manage-
ment of distributed workers. Work & Stress, 32(2), 124–146. [Link]
8373.2017.1390797
OECD. (2020). Unemployment rate (indicator). Retrieved October 23, 2020, from [Link]
[Link]/unemp/[Link]
Olson, M., & Primps, S. (1984). Working at home with computers: Work and non-work
issues. Journal of Social Issues, 40(3), 97–112. [Link]
tb00194.x
Park, S. K., Rhee, M. K., & Barak, M. M. (2016). Job stress and mental health among nonregu-
lar workers in Korea: What dimensions of job stress are associated with mental health?
Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 71(2), 111–118. [Link]
0/19338244.2014.997381
14 Advances in Developing Human Resources 00(0)

Perry, S. J., Rubino, C., & Hunter, E. M. (2018). Stress in remote work: Two studies test-
ing the Demand-Control-Person model. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 27(5), 577–593. [Link]
Prasad, K. D. V., Rao, M., Vaidya, R., & Muralidhar, B. (2020). Organizational climate, oppor-
tunities, challenges and psychological well-being of the remote working employees during
COVID-19 pandemic: A general linear model approach with reference to information tech-
nology industry in Hyderabad. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering
and Technology, 11(4), 372–389.
Raišienė, A. G., Rapuano, V., Varkulevičiūtė, K., & Stachová, K. (2020). Working from
home—who is happy? A survey of lithuania’s employees during the COVID-19 quarantine
period. Sustainability, 12, 5332. [Link]
Sheu, H. B., Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Miller, M. J., Hennessyd, K. D., & Duffye, R. D.
(2010). Testing the choice model of social cognitive career theory across Holland themes:
A meta-analytic path analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(2), 252–264. [Link]
org/10.1016/[Link].2009.10.015
Smith, S. A., Patmos, A., & Pitts, M. J. (2018). Communication and teleworking: A study
of communication channel satisfaction, personality, and job satisfaction for teleworking
employees. International Journal of Business Communication, 55(1), 44–68. [Link]
org/10.1177/0018726709349198
Song, Y., & Gao, J. (2019). Does telework stress employees out? A study on working at home
and subjective well-being for wage/salary workers. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21,
2649–2668. [Link]
Thompson, M. N., Dahling, J. J., Chin, M. Y., & Melloy, R. C. (2017). Integrating job loss,
unemployment, and reemployment with social cognitive career theory. Journal of Career
Assessment, 25(1), 40–57. [Link]
Tremblay, D. G. (2003). Telework: a new mode of gendered segmentation? Results from a
study in Canada. Canadian Journal of Communication, 28, 461–478.
Virick, M., DaSilva, N., & Arrington, K. (2010). Moderators of the curvilinear rela-
tion between extent of telecommuting and life satisfaction: The role of performance
outcome orientation and worker type. Human Relations, 63, 137–154. [Link]
org/10.1177/0018726709349198
Wong, S. C., & Mohd Rasdi, R. (2019). Influences of career establishment strategies on gen-
eration Y’s self-directedness career: Can gender make a difference? European Journal of
Training and Development, 43(5–6), 435–455. [Link]
0082

Author Biographies
Sunyoung Park is an associate professor in the School of Leadership and Human Resource
Development at Louisiana State University. Her research interests include organizational cul-
ture and behavior; learning and performance; leadership; and research trends in the field.
Prior to joining academics, she worked in the corporate and non-profit sectors in the area of
human resource development. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis/St. Paul.
Shinhee Jeong is an assistant professor in the School of Leadership and Human Resource
Development at Louisiana State University. Her specific areas of research revolve around lead-
ership, interpersonal/social relationships, informal learning, and organizational knowledge
Park et al. 15

creation. Additionally, she has a strong background in quantitative methodology including

measurement validation and multi-level/multi-group analyses. She received her Ph.D. from
Texas A&M University.
Dae Seok Chai an assistant professor of Organizational Learning, Performance and Change in
the School of Education at Colorado State University. He has been a proactive researcher with
multiple refereed journal articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, and grant proposals,
based on his three research interests: Cross-cultural adjustment and training, organization devel-
opment in an international context, and leadership in diverse cultural contexts. He received a
Ph.D. from Texas A&M University.