5.

1 Evaluation of findings

5.1.1 Work from home and hybrid working arrangements

The research on remote work presented by Statista (2023) and Sava (2020) indicates that

even though remote – and hybrid working arrangements have been around for a while, the

onset of the global Covid-19 pandemic has served as a catalyst, rapidly accelerating the

overall adoption and implementation of these alternative work setups. The pandemic

compelled organizations to adopt remote work as a necessity to ensure business continuity.

The fact that a majority of individuals have only recently begun working remotely suggests a

lack of familiarity and potentially limited experience with remote work dynamics. This could

lead to challenges in terms of adapting to new tools, communication methods, and work

styles, which may have a direct impact on the mental well-being of employees. Furthermore,

the sudden implementation of remote work may have resulted in organizations not being

adequately prepared to handle the various challenges and complexities associated with

remote working arrangements, especially with regards to maintaining a healthy work-life

balance and addressing potential issues related to mental health or social isolation.

Further to this, the research conducted by Statista (2021) notes that the integration of work-

from-home and hybrid work models will continue to be prevalent in the foreseeable future.

The evidence reveals a shift in work dynamics, affirming the permanence of these alternative

work arrangements. The statistic indicate that nearly half of the participants consider remote

work highly significant seems important, as it suggests that the demand for remote work is

substantial and growing. This suggests that organizations that offer remote work opportunities

may have a competitive advantage in attracting talent in the current job market.
However, it is crucial to approach these findings with some scepticism and consider potential

limitations. Firstly, the survey methodology is not discussed, which raises questions about

how participants were selected and whether the sample is representative of the global

workforce. An unrepresentative sample may introduce bias and limit the generalizability of

the findings. Additionally, the level of significance attributed to remote work is not clearly

defined. It is unclear what criteria participants used to determine the significance of remote

work in their employment choices. This lack of clarity may limit the depth of understanding

of the importance attributed to remote work. Furthermore, the survey focuses on the

participants' subjective perceptions of remote work importance, rather than their actual

behaviours. This distinction is important because individuals' perceptions may not always

align with their actions. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account that respondents' views

may not necessarily translate into concrete decision-making when choosing future

employment. Moreover, the survey does not explore potential variations in the importance of

remote work based on factors such as industry, age or country. Recognizing these variations

could provide a more nuanced understanding of the significance of remote work across

different demographic groups and contexts.

5.1.2 Mental health

According to the study conducted by Bodner et. al. (2022), there is a possible connection

between work setting and the perception of one's own mental health. The researchers aimed

to explore the correlation between different work settings (working only from home, working

only in-person, hybrid working, or a combination of these) and self-rated mental health

among employees during the third wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The study employed an online survey to collect data from 1576 workers. Among the

participants, the majority reported working in a hybrid setting, accounting for 77.2% of the

sample. Moreover, most individuals self-rated their mental health as good (80.7%). One of

the key findings of the study is that both exclusive work from home and exclusive in-person

work were associated with poorer self-rated mental health compared to hybrid work. This

suggests that individuals who either worked solely from home or exclusively in-person

reported a lower perception of their mental well-being. While the study provides valuable

insights into the relationship between work setting and self-rated mental health, it is

important to consider certain limitations. Firstly, the study relies on self-reported data, which

may be subject to recall biases or individuals' subjective interpretations of their mental health.

Furthermore, the study focused solely on Canadian workers during the third wave of the

Covid-19 pandemic. The generalizability of the findings to different populations and contexts

may be limited. It would be beneficial for future research to examine the long-term effects of

work setting on mental health in different regions and beyond the specific pandemic context.

The evidence from both the study presented by Westfall (2020) and and the researvh

conducted by by Kismono, Paramita, and Lintang (2023) supports the notion that mental

health is a significant concern for today's remote workforce. The statement presented in the

opinion of Westfall (2020) regarding mental health being a significant concern for today's

remote workforce is supported by the findings of the survey conducted by TELUS

International. The fact that 80% of workers would consider leaving their current jobs for

positions that prioritize employees' mental well-being highlights the current importance of

mental health in the workplace. The research indicating that 75% of U.S. workers have

experienced work-related anxiety due to the Covid-19 pandemic. This statistic suggests that
the remote workforce is particularly vulnerable to mental health issues in the current

circumstances.

The study conducted by Kismono, Paramita, and Lintang (2023) examines the relationship

between acceptance of remote work and employees' life satisfaction. The focus on decreased

job stress and improved work-life balance as potential contributors to higher life satisfaction

adds to the understanding of mental well-being in the remote work context. The use of a

purposive sampling technique in the study limits the generalizability of the findings to the

wider population. It should be noted that by only including employees from various industries

in Indonesia who were working from home, the study fails to capture the experiences of

remote workers in other countries or industries. Additionally, the limited system and

technological support mentioned in the choice of participants may influence the results and

restrict their applicability to other contexts and industries. Furthermore, the number of data

points collected (406) is relatively small, potentially affecting the overall reliability and

representativeness of the study. A larger sample size would provide a more comprehensive

understanding of the relationship between acceptance of remote work and employees' life

satisfaction.

Agovino (2018) claims that the workplace is the top location for fostering a sense of

belonging. It also suggests that employees value genuine interest from colleagues in their

well-being more than other forms of recognition or inclusiveness. One strength of the

statement is that it provides specific percentages for each category, giving readers a clear idea

of the relative importance employees place on different factors. This quantitative data adds

credibility to the argument. However, the statement could benefit from providing more

context on the methodology of the study. Without this information, it is unclear how
representative the results are and whether they can be generalized to other populations and/or

industries.

The survey conducted by Howington (2023) on over 5,600 working professionals aimed to

explore the effects of recent workforce changes on mental well-being and understand

professionals' perspectives on remote work. Overall, the insights obtained from the survey

have provided valuable information about the evolving workplace and professionals'

experiences. One notable finding from the survey is that remote work has been beneficial for

mental well-being. A significant majority of individuals reported feeling supported and

accomplished in some remote capacity. This suggests that the flexibility and autonomy

associated with remote work can have positive effects on professionals' mental state. This

finding aligns with previous research that has highlighted the potential advantages of remote

work for reducing stress and improving work-life balance. Interestingly, the survey found that

a significant majority of respondents (47%) believe that working from home full time is the

arrangement that best supports their mental health. This suggests that having a consistent and

predictable work environment, free from the distractions and stressors of commuting and

office politics, contributes to improved mental well-being. On the other hand, only 17% of

respondents indicated that a hybrid working arrangement best supports their mental well-

being. This finding may indicate that professionals prefer the stability and routine of working

remotely full-time rather than dealing with the challenges of balancing in-person and remote

work.

However, it is important to note that the findings of this survey may be subject to

certain limitations. For instance, the sample size of the survey, while substantial, may

not represent the entire population of working professionals accurately. Additionally,

the survey was conducted within a specific timeframe, and the effects of remote work on

mental well-being may vary over time. Therefore, it would be beneficial for future

research to replicate the study with a larger and more diverse sample to strengthen the

generalizability of the findings.

The results of the survey conducted by RSPH highlight the mixed impacts of working from

home on individuals' health and overall well-being. While a majority of respondents

expressed a desire to divide their work between home and the office, it is important to

recognize that certain groups face more severe negative effects than others.One concerning

finding is the detrimental effects on the mental and physical health of individuals who share

their living space with multiple housemates or work from uncomfortable settings like their

bedroom or sofa. This suggests that the physical environment in which individuals work has a

significant impact on their well-being. It is crucial for organizations to provide employees

with suitable workspaces and options to create a conducive work environment at home. The

survey also highlights various negative health and well-being issues faced by those who

transitioned to remote work due to Covid-19. The most common issues included feeling less

connected to colleagues, engaging in less physical exercise, experiencing musculoskeletal

problems, and having disrupted sleep. These findings underscore the importance of

maintaining social connections and promoting physical activity and ergonomic work setups

for remote workers. Furthermore, individuals who lived with multiple housemates were more

likely to view working from home as negative for their health and well-being. This indicates

that the presence of distractions or lack of privacy in shared living spaces can have a

significant impact on productivity and overall well-being. Employers should be aware of

these challenges and provide guidance and support to remote workers in such settings. The

data also show disparities between different demographic groups. Women were more likely
than men to experience feelings of isolation and musculoskeletal issues from working at

home. This suggests that organizations should pay attention to the specific needs and

challenges faced by women remote workers to ensure their well-being and productivity.

Xiang et al. (2020) conducted a study that aimed to examine the impact of working from

home during the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. The study utilized an online survey

conducted in South Korea, involving 2,000 households. The mental health and well-being of

participants were measured using a psychological distress scale that assessed depressive

symptoms. One strength of the study is its large sample size, involving 2,000 households.

This allows for a more representative sample and enhances the generalizability of the

findings to the population of South Korea. Additionally, conducting the survey online

provides convenience and accessibility for participants, potentially increasing the likelihood

of participation and yielding more accurate results. However, the study also has several

limitations. Firstly, the study design is cross-sectional, meaning that it only captures a

snapshot of data at a single point in time. This limits the ability to establish causal

relationships between working from home and mental health outcomes. Additionally, the

reliance on self-report measures may introduce response bias, as participants may be

influenced by social desirability or may not accurately recall and report their mental health

symptoms. The findings of the study suggest that working from home during the pandemic

has a negative impact on mental health, particularly in terms of increased depression.

Specifically, participants reported increased levels of lethargy, sadness, tiredness, and

worthlessness. However, it should be noted that the effects on feeling anxious and restless

were less significant. In terms of implications, these findings highlight the importance of
addressing mental health concerns and providing support for individuals who are working

from home during the pandemic. Employers and policymakers should consider implementing

strategies to promote mental well-being, such as providing resources for managing stress and

maintaining work-life balance. Additionally, further research is needed to explore the specific

factors contributing to the negative impact of working from home on mental health and to

investigate potential interventions to mitigate these effects.

A study by Van Doesum et al. (2023) provides valuable insights into the impact of the

COVID-19 pandemic on mental health professionals in the Netherlands. The authors

effectively examined various aspects, including workload, stress, sleeping problems, and

overall mental health, to assess the challenges faced by mental health professionals during the

initial phases of the pandemic. One strength of the study is the use of a cross-sectional design,

which allows for a snapshot of the situation at a specific point in time. This enables the

researchers to draw comparisons and identify differences between mental health professionals

and the general population. The inclusion of both quantitative and qualitative data also

enhances the analysis by providing a comprehensive understanding of the experiences and

needs of mental health professionals.

The findings of the study clearly demonstrate the negative effects of the pandemic on mental

health professionals. The significant increase in workload, stress, sleeping problems, and

decline in overall mental health highlights the toll that the pandemic has taken on these

professionals. The identification of factors such as stress, physical health complaints, fatigue,

and work-life balance issues further adds depth to the analysis by pinpointing specific

challenges faced by mental health professionals. The study also highlights the importance of

protective factors in mitigating the negative impact on mental health. Organizational and

social support were identified as crucial in helping mental health professionals cope with the

challenges posed by the pandemic. The rapid adoption of technological solutions and creative
approaches to maintain face-to-face contact with clients and colleagues also demonstrate the

resilience and adaptability of mental health professionals. However, there are certain

limitations to consider. Firstly, the cross-sectional design of the study limits the ability to

establish causality. It is unclear whether the identified challenges and outcomes were solely

due to the pandemic or if other factors also contributed. Additionally, the study focuses on the

experiences of mental health professionals in the Netherlands, which may limit

generalizability to other populations and countries. Furthermore, the study primarily relies on

self-reported measures, which may introduce biases such as recall bias or social desirability

bias. The qualitative component of the study helps to provide a deeper understanding of the

survey findings, but the researchers noted that the participants did not fully realize the extent

of the adverse effects until the focus group discussions. This suggests a potential limitation in

the self-awareness of the participants.

The positive effect of remote work on mental health can be seen through several aspects.

Firstly, remote work provides a greater sense of flexibility and autonomy over one's schedule

and environment. This flexibility allows individuals to tailor their workday to fit around their

personal needs and preferences, which can contribute to reduced stress levels and improved

overall well-being. Remote work also eliminates the daily commute, which can be a

significant source of stress for many individuals. By eliminating the need to travel to and

from the workplace, remote workers can save time, avoid traffic congestion, and reduce

exposure to crowded public transportation. This reduction in commuting-related stress can

lead to better mental health outcomes, such as reduced anxiety and fatigue. Moreover, remote

work often allows individuals to create a more comfortable and personalized work

environment. With the ability to set up a designated workspace according to their preferences,

remote workers can create a space that promotes focus, concentration, and productivity.

Remote work also offers greater work-life balance, as it allows individuals to integrate

personal and professional responsibilities more seamlessly. Being able to spend more time

with family and engage in personal activities during breaks or after work hours can

significantly improve overall happiness and contentment. Remote work provides an

opportunity to devote time and attention to self-care and to engage in activities that promote

mental well-being, such as exercise, hobbies, and relaxation techniques. Additionally, remote

work can also reduce workplace-related stress factors, such as office politics, constant

interruptions, and pressure from coworkers. By working remotely, individuals can focus on

their tasks with fewer distractions, leading to increased productivity and job satisfaction. This

improved work experience can positively impact mental health, reducing the likelihood of

burnout and promoting a more positive attitude towards work. Overall, the positive effect of

remote work on mental health is evident through the increased flexibility, reduced commuting

stress, personalized work environment, improved work-life balance, and decreased

workplace-related stress factors. By promoting a healthier work-life integration and providing

individuals with more control over their work environment, it is evident that these factors

promote mental well-being and overall happiness.

However, while remote work has undoubtedly gained popularity in recent years and offers

various benefits, it also comes with its fair share of negative effects.

Isolation and loneliness: Remote work often involves working alone for extended periods,

which can lead to feelings of isolation and loneliness. The absence of regular face-to-face

interaction and camaraderie found in a traditional office setting can have a detrimental effect

on an individual's mental health, leading to decreased motivation, reduced job satisfaction,

and even depression in some cases.

Lack of work-life balance: While remote work allows for increased flexibility, it can blur the

boundaries between work and personal life. Without a clear separation between the two,

employees may find themselves constantly working, checking emails, or attending to work-

related tasks even during their designated time off. This can lead to burnout, stress, and

strained relationships with family and friends.

Communication challenges: Working remotely often relies heavily on technology for

communication. However, technological glitches, poor internet connections, and

miscommunications due to the absence of non-verbal cues can hinder effective collaboration

and teamwork. It becomes more challenging to build relationships, resolve conflicts,

brainstorm ideas, and maintain a cohesive team dynamic.

Decreased productivity and accountability: The lack of direct supervision and physical

presence in a remote work environment may cause some employees to become less focused,

leading to decreased productivity. The freedom and flexibility granted by remote work can

sometimes make it easier to succumb to distractions, procrastination, or lack of motivation.

Additionally, the absence of a physical workspace and colleagues can make it easier for some

individuals to shirk responsibilities and become less accountable for their work.

Limited career growth and networking opportunities: Remote work can impose limitations on

career growth and networking opportunities. Being physically detached from the office

environment may result in less visibility and fewer chances to participate in important

meetings, presentations, or even casual conversations that could impact career advancement.

Remote workers may also miss out on networking events, social gatherings, and other

professional development opportunities.

Impact on organizational culture and team dynamics: A strong organizational culture and

team dynamic can be more difficult to foster and maintain with remote employees. The lack

of physical presence can inhibit the development of meaningful relationships, shared values,

and a common company culture. This can create a sense of detachment and hinder

collaborative efforts, teamwork, and shared goals.

Inadequate infrastructure and resources: Remote work relies heavily on reliable internet

connections, appropriate software, and hardware to function effectively. Some employees

may not have access to a conducive work environment or the necessary technological

resources, causing them to face limitations in performing their job responsibilities efficiently.

Despite the negative effects, it is essential to note that remote work impacts individuals

differently, and with thoughtful planning and implementation, many of these drawbacks can

be mitigated or overcome. Employers and employees can work together to establish clear

guidelines, provide support systems, and prioritize well-being to ensure the success of remote

work arrangements.

5.2 Re-assessment of Research Questions in relation to research findings and literature