IMPACT OF FLEXIBLE WORK, TECHNOSTRESS ON PERFORMANCE WITH SUPERVISOR SUPPORT AS A MODERATING VARIABLE

Turmudi; Janita S Meliala; Joko Rizkie Widokarti

doi:10.32509/mirshus.v5i1.87

Turmudi Universitas Terbuka, Jakarta
Janita S Meliala Universitas Bina Nusantara, Jakarta
Joko Rizkie Widokarti Universitas Terbuka, Jakarta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32509/mirshus.v5i1.87

Keywords: Flexible working arrangement, technostress, employee performance, supervisor support

Abstract

After the COVID-19 pandemic, many organizations asked employees to return to conventional work arrangements. However, the worsening air quality in DKI Jakarta led the government to implement a work from home policy for civil servants. Concerns have arisen about the performance of civil servants if work from home a form of flexible working arrangement, is implemented permanently. Thus, this research is performed to investigate the influence of flexible working arrangement on performance, incorporating technostress as an independent variable and supervisor support as a moderating variable. Using a quantitative method, 507 civil servants in DKI Jakarta who experienced flexible working arrangement for at least six months participated in the study. Data were collected via an online questionnaire and analyzed using multiple regression and moderation regression methods. The results revealed that flexible working arrangement positively and significantly influences employee performance. Technostress negatively and significantly affects performance. Supervisor support strengthens the positive impact of flexible working arrangement on performance, but its moderating effect on technostress is non-significant. Thus, while flexible working arrangement improves performance, and technostress hinders it, the negative impact of technostress can be mitigated by supervisor support, reducing its significance. This research underscores the importance of balancing flexible work arrangements with adequate supervisor support to enhance civil servants' performance.

References

Azar, S., Khan, A., & Van Eerde, W. (2018). Modelling linkages between flexible work arrangements’ use and organizational outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 91, 134–143.

Bainbridge, H. T. J., & Townsend, K. (2020). The effects of offering flexible work practices to employees with unpaid caregiving responsibilities for elderly or disabled family members. Human Resource Management, 59(5), 483–495.

Choi, S. (2018). Managing flexible work arrangements in government: Testing the effects of institutional and managerial support. Public Personnel Management, 47(1), 26–50.

Crowley, J. E., & Kolenikov, S. (2014). Flexible work options and mothers’ perceptions of career harm. The Sociological Quarterly, 55(1), 168–195.

Davidescu, A. A., Apostu, S.-A., Paul, A., & Casuneanu, I. (2020). Work flexibility, job satisfaction, and job performance among Romanian employees—Implications for sustainable human resource management. Sustainability, 12(15), 6086.

De Menezes, L. M., & Kelliher, C. (2017). Flexible working, individual performance, and employee attitudes: Comparing formal and informal arrangements. Human Resource Management, 56(6), 1051–1070.

Den Dulk, L., Peper, B., Kanjuo Mrčela, A., & Ignjatović, M. (2016). Supervisory support in Slovenian and Dutch organizations: a contextualizing approach. Community, Work & Family, 19(2), 193–212.

Hessari, H., & Nategh, T. (2022). The role of co-worker support for tackling techno stress along with these influences on need for recovery and work motivation. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 12(2), 233–259.

IWG plc. (2021). Why a hybrid working model makes financial sense in 2022. Work.Iwgplc.Com. https://work.iwgplc.com/MediaCentre/Article/why-hybrid-working-makes-financial-sense

Kusbiyantoro, G. (2022). EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE AT THE GENERAL BUREAU OF THE AUDIT AGENCY OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA. Moestopo International Review on Social, Humanities, and Sciences, 2(2), 181–189.

Li, L., & Wang, X. (2021). Technostress inhibitors and creators and their impacts on university teachers’ work performance in higher education. Cognition, Technology & Work, 23(2), 315–330.

Rachmanantya, A., & Martdianty, F. (2023). The implication of supervisor support and flexible working arrangement on job satisfaction and job performance, mediated by the work-life balance of civil servants in government institutions in Indonesia. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2765(1).

Stavrou, E., & Ierodiakonou, C. (2011). Flexible work arrangements and intentions of unemployed women in Cyprus: a planned behaviour model. British Journal of Management, 22(1), 150–172.

Stavrou, E. T. (2005). Flexible work bundles and organizational competitiveness: A cross‐national study of the European work context. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 26(8), 923–947.

Tarafdar, M., Bolman Pullins, E., & Ragu-Nathan, T. S. (2014). Examining impacts of technostress on the professional salesperson’s behavioural performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 34(1), 51–69.

Yang, E., Kim, Y., & Hong, S. (2021). Does working from home work? Experience of working from home and the value of hybrid workplace post-COVID-19. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 25(1), 50–76.