This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Working from home and digital technology may be making it easier for employees to work while ill and blurring the boundaries between work and home, according to a new study. The paper, by Sir Cary Cooper, a professor at The University of Manchester; Professor Luo Lu of National Taiwan University; and Professor Shu-Fang Kao of Soochow University, argues that traditional definitions of presenteeism no longer reflect the realities of modern working life.
The research is published in the journal Health Psychology Research. The researchers say the widespread adoption of remote and hybrid working means many employees no longer need to physically go into the workplace to do their jobs while unwell. Instead, they can remain at home, respond to emails or messages, attend virtual meetings or carry out urgent tasks while ill.
The study argues that this creates new challenges for understanding the impact of an increasingly always-on workplace culture. The researchers propose redefining presenteeism as the "behavior of attending work in the state of suboptimal health, with varied location choices and degree of engagement." This means that presenteeism should be understood not simply in terms of whether someone turns up to work, but also where they work, what health problem they are experiencing and how much effort they put into working. The authors argue that existing approaches to measuring presenteeism are too narrow because they generally focus on how often people go to work despite being ill, or on the extent to which illness affects their productivity.
Instead, they propose a three-dimensional framework based on health, location and engagement. The first dimension considers whether presenteeism is triggered by a physical or mental health problem. The second considers whether someone works onsite or remotely.
The third considers whether they work a full schedule with normal levels of engagement or reduce their hours and effort. Together, these dimensions produce eight different forms of presenteeism. For example, an employee with a physical illness might go into the workplace and work a full day, while another might stay at home and only deal with urgent requests.
Someone experiencing anxiety or depression could similarly work either remotely or onsite, with either full or reduced engagement. The researchers say this approach could help distinguish between situations where working while ill may be harmful and situations where employees are able to adapt their work in ways that allow them to protect their health while meeting essential responsibilities. The paper also highlights concerns about inequality in access to flexible working.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
