Diversity of employees' preferences towards creative versus routine work, and individual versus teamwork in remote work conditions
Patrycja Mizera-Pęczek
Abstract
The change in preferred work models that occurred during the pandemic and post-pandemic period has meant that both creative and reproductive work now takes place in stationary, hybrid, and fully remote conditions. Employees, both those performing creative and reproductive work, in teams or individually, increasingly have to function efficiently in virtual reality, and thus in conditions of physical loneliness. Therefore, this article aims to identify how performing work remotely contributed to changing the preferences of creative and non-creative employees towards performing professional duties of a creative versus routine nature, individually or in teams. The research was carried out using the CAWI survey method among 1,000 respondents in Poland, examining their opinions on the preferences for performing work of various types in remote conditions. The study showed that each of the four types of work examined is a challenge for employees who work remotely, with the majority of respondents declaring that each type of work (creative individual, creative team, routine individual, and routine team) is more difficult for them than in the pre-pandemic reality. Moreover, it was found that the more creative the nature of the work performed, the more negatively employees assessed the preferences for performing creative and routine work, both in teams and individually.
Managing creative and reproductive work is one of the most important challenges for modern managers. Currently, many scientific discussions concern what work can be automated or entrusted to artificial intelligence, and what should remain in human hands. This article may be of interest to managers as well as psychologists and creativity educators, whose task will be to prepare work teams to perform creative tasks (work of a creative nature) in remote conditions. The original value of the presented work is such a broad approach to research issues, considering both preferences for creativity and reproduction of work in conditions of individual remote work and remote teamwork. The article takes into account aspects that are important from the perspective of human resources management, management of creative teams, and employee creativity management with the increasing use of hybrid and fully remote work models in organisations.
Keywords: creative work, reproductive work, teamwork, individual work, remote work
References
- Allen, K., Quinn, J., Hollingworth, S. i Rose, A. (2013). Becoming employable students and 'ideal' creative workers: exclusion and inequality in higher education work placements. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 431-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2012.714249
- Ashton, D. (2015). Creative work careers: pathways and portfolios for the creative economy. Journal of Education and Work, 28(4), 388-406. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.997685
- Becker, W. J., Belkin, L. Y., Tuskey, S. E. i Conroy, S. A. (2022). Surviving remotely: How job control and loneliness during a forced shift to remote work impacted employee work behaviors and well-being. Human Resource Management, 61(4), 449-464. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22102
- Bérubé, J. i Demers, Ch. (2019). Creative organizations: when management fosters creative work. Creative Industries Journal, 12(3), 314-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/17510694.2019.1621619
- Bratnicka, K. (2011). Rola przywództwa w stymulowaniu twórczości w organizacjach. Organizacja i Kierowanie, 4(147), 129-141.
- Chi, N. W., Liao, H. H. i Chien, W. L. (2021). Having a creative day: a daily diary study of the interplay between daily activating moods and physical work environment on daily creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(3), 752-768. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.488
- Christopherson, S. (2008). Beyond the self-expressive creative worker: An industry perspective on entertainment media. Theory, Culture & Society, 25(7-8), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276408097797
- Cirella, S. (2021). Managing collective creativity: Organizational variables to support creative teamwork. European Management Review, 18(4), 404-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12475
- Cortes, G. M., Jaimovich, N. i Siu, H. E. (2017). Disappearing routine jobs: Who, how, and why? Journal of Monetary Economics, 91, 69-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2017.09.006
- Dewicka, A. (2013). Unikatowe kompetencje pracowników determinantą innowacyjności przedsiębiorstwa. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Poznańskiej. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 61, 19-27.
- Fauchart, E., Bacache-Beauvallet, M., Bourreau, M. i Moreau, F. (2022). Do-It-Yourself or Do-It-Together: How digital technologies affect creating alone or with others? Technovation, 112, 102412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102412
- Figurska, I. i Sokół A. (2023). The impact of selected components of the manager-employee relations on the performance of creative tasks in the organization. European Research Studies Journal, 26(2), 221-231. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/3164
- Goldsmith, B. i Bridgstock, R. (2015). Embedded creative workers and creative work in education. Journal of Education and Work, 28(4), 369-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.997684
- Harrison, S. H. i Nurmohamed, S. (2023). Dirty creativity: An inductive study of how creative workers champion new designs that are stigmatized. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 175, 104224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104224
- Khlystova, O., Kalyuzhnova, Y. i Belitski, M. (2022). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the creative industries: A literature review and future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 139, 1192-1210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.062
- Krajewska-Nieckarz, M. (2016). Uwarunkowania kreatywności pracowników i twórczości organizacyjnej w kontekście zmian. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 457, 42-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.15611/pn.2016.457.04
- Kubicka, D. (2005). Strategie i techniki badania twórczości. W: A. Tokarz (red.), W poszukiwaniu zastosowań psychologii twórczości (s. 125-153). Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
- Kuśpit, M. A. (2021). Postawa twórcza pracowników organizacji a ich nadzieja na sukces. Kultura i Edukacja, 3(133), 226-242. https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2021.03.13
- Lipka, A. (2018). Różnice indywidualne w kreatywnym zespole jako źródło ryzyka personalnego. Studia i Prace Kolegium Zarządzania i Finansów, 161, 111-122. https://doi.org/10.33119/SIP.2018.161.8
- Mizera-Pęczek, P. (2015). Wybrane stymulatory aktywności twórczej pracowników działu marketingu w firmie farmaceutycznej. Studia Ekonomiczne Regionu Łódzkiego, 18, 43-52.
- Mizera-Pęczek, P. (2023). Koncepcja kształtowania audiosfery miejsca pracy. Między sztuką a zarządzaniem. Edukacja Ekonomistów i Menedżerów, 67(1), 59-69.
- Miyake, F., Odgerel, C. O., Hino, A., Ikegami, K., Nagata, T., Tateishi, S., Tsuji, M., Matsuda, S. i Ishimaru, T. (2021). Job stress and loneliness among desk workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: focus on remote working. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 27(33). https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.22-00107
- Nęcka, E. (1999). Postawy wobec twórczości w miejscu pracy. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 5(1), 69-76.
- Nogalski, B. i Niewiadomski, P. (2016). Szczupła produkcja jako rezultat inicjowania twórczości pracowników wykonawczych - studium przypadku implementacji wyrobu złożonego. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 93.
- Pestonjee, D. M. i Pastakia, T. A. (2022). The post-pandemic workplace: challenges and prospects. W: K. S. Dhiman i J. F. Marques (red.), Leadership after COVID-19: Working together toward a sustainable future (s. 361-375). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84867-5_21
- Pianese, T., Errichiello, L. i da Cunha, J. V. (2023). Organizational control in the context of remote working: A synthesis of empirical findings and a research agenda. European Management Review, 20(2), 326-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12515
- Shapero, A. (1985). Managing creative professionals. Research Management, 28(2), 23-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00345334.1985.11756888
- Sidor-Rządkowska, M. (2022). Praca zdalna i hybrydowa a budowanie wizerunku pracodawcy w czasach postpandemicznych. Marketing i Rynek, 12, 28-36.
- Staaby, A., Hansen, K. S. i Gronli, T. M. (2021). Automation of routine work: A case study of employees' experiences of work meaningfulness. Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2021 (s. 156-165). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.018
- Szmidt, K. J. (2018). Teoretyczno-badawcze nurty w polskiej kreatologii. Nauki o Wychowaniu. Studia Interdyscyplinarne, 7(2), 8-43. https://doi.org/10.18778/2450-4491.07.01
- Szmidt, K. J. i Modrzejewska-Świgulska, M. (2020). Together or Separately: Dilemmas of Group Work in Professional Creativity. Creativity Theories - Research -Applications, 7(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.2478/ctra-2020-0001
- Szwiec, P. (2012). Twórczość pracownicza w kontekście grup funkcjonujących w organizacjach. Organization and Management, 152.
- Taser, D., Aydin, E., Torgaloz, A. O. i Rofcanin, Y. (2022). An examination of remote e-working and flow experience: The role of technostress and loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior, 127, 107020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107020
- Taylor, S. i Luckman, S. (2020). Creative aspiration and the betrayal of promise? The experience of new creative workers. W: S. Taylor i S. Luckman (red.), Pathways into creative working lives (s. 1-27). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38246-9_1
- Tse, T. (2022). Work faster, harder, cheaper? Global, local and sectoral co-configurations of job insecurities among Hong Kong creative workers. Critical Sociology, 48(7-8), 1141-1167. https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205221087345
- Usabiaga, C., Núnez, F., Arendt, L., Gałecka-Burdziak, E. i Pater, R. (2022). Skill requirements and labour polarisation: An association analysis based on Polish online job offers. Economic Modelling, 115, 105963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2022.105963
- Wang, K. i Nickerson, J. V. (2017). A literature review on individual creativity support systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 139-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.035
- Wojtczuk-Turek, A. (2013). Jakość relacji lider - podwładny a kreowanie innowacyjności pracowników - empiryczna analiza zależności. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Oeconomica, 283.
- Wróblewska, H. M. (2022). Kompetencje twórcze w perspektywie pozytywnych zasobów. Podstawy Edukacji, 15, 133-146.
- Yakymovych, Y. (2022). Consequences of job loss for routine workers (Working Paper, No. 2022:15). Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/273144/1/1810543754.pdf
- 41. Ziemba, P., Piwowarski, M. i Nermend, K. (2023). Remote work in post-pandemic reality - multi-criteria evaluation of teleconferencing software. Sustainability, 15(13), 9919 https://doi.org/10.3390/su15139919
Add to: Del.icio.us Facebook Wykop Twitter.com Blip.pl Digg.com
AUTHOR |
About the article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15219/em103.1646
The article is in the printed version on pages 16-24.
How to cite
Mizera-Pęczek, P. (2024). Różnorodność preferencji pracowników wobec pracy twórczej versus rutynowej oraz indywidualnej versus zespołowej w warunkach pracy zdalnej. e-mentor, 1(103), 16-24. https://doi.org/10.15219/em103.1646
Table of contents