University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout

(USC Thesis Other)

Management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout: An Innovation Study

Stephen Blake

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

© Copyright by Stephen Blake 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Stephen Blake certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Susanne Foulk
Robert Filback
Adrian Donato, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
Mandatory office closures during the COVID-19 pandemic catapulted virtual work to an
unprecedented scale in the United States. Another growing trend in the U.S. workforce
exacerbated by the pandemic is work-related burnout syndrome. This study considered the
relationship between virtual work and burnout and addressed the nascent problem of virtual
employee burnout. Leveraging an organization to investigate the problem, this innovation study
entailed a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational
resources necessary for managers to achieve a new stakeholder goal related to meeting
management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The conceptual framework
adapted gap analysis into an innovation model to investigate managers’ assumed needs based on
the literature review. The study utilized a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design entailing
a survey, interviews, and document analysis. The study’s findings informed solution
recommendations and an integrated implementation and evaluation plan. The study’s limitations
and delimitations reside in the study’s pragmatic design to solve an intractable problem of
practice within a specific organization. The study’s primary contribution is a conceptual
construct of virtual employee burnout. Future researchers can leverage this construct to further
investigate virtual employee burnout in various contexts and with different demographics.
Keywords: Burnout, employee engagement, employee well-being, future of work, remote
work, virtual work, telework, work engagement.

v
Dedication
To my wife, Tori, and our children, Saylen and Parker.

vi
Acknowledgements
Thank you to the Rossier School ecosystem that ensured I was supported, challenged, and
encouraged throughout this journey. Thank you to members of Cohort 18 who inspired me and
collaborated with me on coursework. Of note, thank you to Daniel Scott for being an incredible
accountability partner and relentless pacesetter. Thank you to my chair, Dr. Adrian Donato, who
was also the professor for my first class in the program and, later, one of the most challenging
classes. Dr. Donato’s structured thinking and calmness always provided clear direction and
motivation to complete the journey. Thank you to my committee, Dr. Foulk and Dr. Filback, for
your reviews and feedback to sharpen my work. Thank you to Dr. Alexandra Wilcox for taking
the time early in the program to outline the dissertation process and invite recent graduates into
class time to share their journey. Thank you to Dr. Richard Grad for sharing your best practices
with me. Thank you to Dr. Douglas Lynch, who consistently offered a promising and light-
hearted outlook. Thank you to all my coursework professors: Dr. Kalim Rayburn, Dr. Esther
Kim, Dr. Larry Hausner, Dr. Brandon Martínez, and Dr. Heather Davis. Thank you to the team
members of the doctoral support center and student success team for your support.
Author Note
Stephen Blake
This study was registered with the University of Southern California Institutional Review
Board (Study ID: UP-22-00477). I have no conflicts of interest to disclose. There was no funding
received. Thank you to Dr. Guadalupe Montano for copyediting the manuscript.
Correspondence concerning this dissertation should be addressed to Stephen Blake.
Email: sgpblake@gmail.com.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1
Organizational Context and Mission ...................................................................................1
Organizational Performance Status ......................................................................................3
Related Literature.................................................................................................................5
Importance of Addressing the Problem ...............................................................................7
Organizational Performance SMART Goal .........................................................................8
Description of Stakeholder Groups ......................................................................................9
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study ...................................10
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................12
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework ..........................................12
Organization of the Project ................................................................................................13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................14
Virtual Work ......................................................................................................................14
Burnout ..............................................................................................................................28
Virtual Employee Burnout .................................................................................................46
Management Best Practices for Mitigating Virtual Employee Burnout ............................53
Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework ..................................................61
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ...............................63

viii
Conceptual Framework for Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee
Burnout ..............................................................................................................................88
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................91
Chapter Three: Methods ................................................................................................................92
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .....................................................................92
Overview of Design ...........................................................................................................94
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................96
Data Collection and Instrumentation ...............................................................................103
Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................109
Credibility and Trustworthiness .......................................................................................111
Validity and Reliability ....................................................................................................112
Ethics................................................................................................................................114
Role of Investigator..........................................................................................................115
Limitations and Delimitations ..........................................................................................116
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................119
Participating Stakeholders ...............................................................................................120
Determination of Assets and Needs .................................................................................120
Results and Findings ........................................................................................................122
Summary of Influences ....................................................................................................186
Chapter Five: Recommended Solutions and Integrated Plan ......................................................189
Organizational Performance Goal ....................................................................................189
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................190
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study ..................................................................190
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..............................................................................190
Introduction and Overview ..............................................................................................191
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ..........................................193

ix
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ..............................................................212
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ....................................................................233
Limitations and Delimitations ..........................................................................................234
Future Research ...............................................................................................................236
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................238
References ....................................................................................................................................241
Appendix A: Pre-Interview Emails ..............................................................................................290
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ................................................................292
Appendix C: KMO Survey Protocol ............................................................................................294
Appendix D: KMO Interview Protocol........................................................................................298
Appendix E: KMO Document Analysis Protocol ........................................................................303
Appendix F: Virtual Management Training Module Evaluation Form .......................................306
Appendix G: Director of Operations VMT Evaluation Form ......................................................307
Appendix H: VMT Post-program Evaluation Form ....................................................................308
Appendix I: VMT Post-program Delayed Evaluation Form .......................................................309
Appendix J: Data Reporting Dashboard Examples .....................................................................311

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Aligned
Stakeholder Performance Goal ...................................................................................................... 11
Table 2: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on ACPO Managers’ Ability to
Achieve the Stakeholder Performance Goal ..................................................................................71
Table 3: Assumed Knowledge Influences, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence
Assessment .....................................................................................................................................72
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve
the Performance Goal ....................................................................................................................80
Table 5: Assumed Motivation Influences, Motivation Type, and Motivation Influence
Assessment .....................................................................................................................................81
Table 6: Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to
Achieve the Performance Goal ......................................................................................................87
Table 7: Assumed Organizational Influences, Organizational Culture Type, and
Organizational Influence Assessment ............................................................................................88
Table 8: Data Sources ....................................................................................................................95
Table 9: Sampling Strategy ..........................................................................................................104
Table 10: Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences With Respective
Assessment Methods .................................................................................................................... 113
Table 11: Threshold Criteria for Needs and Assets ......................................................................122
Table 12: Knowledge Influences and Validation Summary .........................................................123
Table 13: Survey Results for Q.5 .................................................................................................132
Table 14: Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Building Trust ................................134
Table 15: Survey Results for Q.6 .................................................................................................137
Table 16: Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Manager Feedback .........................139
Table 17: Assumed Motivation Influences and Validation Summary ..........................................150
Table 18: Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Managers’ Expectancy-Value ........156
Table 19: Assumed Organizational Influences and Validation Summary ....................................166
Table 20: Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data .............................................187

xi
Table 21: Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ..............................................187
Table 22: Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ........................................188
Table 23: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations .......................................195
Table 24: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ........................................204
Table 25: Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations ..................................207
Table 26: Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation .......................................................213
Table 27: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes .......................216
Table 28: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for ACPO Managers ....................219
Table 29: Required Drivers to Support ACPO Managers’ Critical Behaviors .............................220
Table 30: Components of Learning for the Program ...................................................................227
Table 31: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program .....................................................228
Table D1: Interview Protocol .......................................................................................................300
Table E1: Document Analysis Protocol .......................................................................................304

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Areas of Worklife Scale and Maslach Burnout Inventory ..............................................38
Figure 2: Job Demands-Resources Model .....................................................................................40
Figure 3: Impacts of Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges on Job Demands and Resources......48
Figure 4: Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges Incorporation into JD-R Model ........................51
Figure 5: Management Impacts on Virtual Employee Strain, Motivation, and Performance ........60
Figure 6: Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Framework ..................................................................62
Figure 7: Conceptual Framework for Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual
Employee Burnout .........................................................................................................................90
Figure 8: Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Framework Adapted to an Innovation Model ................93
Figure 9: ACPO Management Organizational Chart, and Data Source Criteria ...........................97
Figure 10: Triangulated Data Collection and Analysis Design for Investigating ACPO
Managers’ Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Needs for Meeting their
Stakeholder Goal .......................................................................................................................... 111
Figure 11: Survey Results for Q.1 ...............................................................................................124
Figure 12: Survey Results for Q.2 ...............................................................................................125
Figure 13: Survey Results for Q.3 ...............................................................................................125
Figure 14: Survey Results for Q.4 ...............................................................................................126
Figure 15: Survey Results for Q.7 ...............................................................................................143
Figure 16: Survey Results for Q.8 ...............................................................................................144
Figure 17: Survey Results for Q.9 ...............................................................................................146
Figure 18: Survey Results for Q.10 .............................................................................................147
Figure 19: Survey Results for Q.11 .............................................................................................151
Figure 20: Survey Results for Q.12 .............................................................................................152
Figure 21: Survey Results for Q.13 .............................................................................................152
Figure 22: Survey Results for Q.14 .............................................................................................153

xiii
Figure 23: Survey Results for Q.15 .............................................................................................153
Figure 24: Survey Results for Q.16 .............................................................................................158
Figure 25: Survey Results for Q.17 .............................................................................................159
Figure 26: Survey Results for Q.18 .............................................................................................162
Figure 27: Survey Results for Q.19 .............................................................................................163
Figure 28: Survey Results for Q.20 .............................................................................................164
Figure 29: Survey Results for Q.21 .............................................................................................168
Figure 30: Survey Results for Q.22 .............................................................................................169
Figure 31: Survey Results for Q.23 .............................................................................................170
Figure 32: Survey Results for Q.24 .............................................................................................174
Figure 33: Survey Results for Q.25: ............................................................................................175
Figure 34: Survey Results for Q.26 .............................................................................................176
Figure 35: Survey Results for Q.27 .............................................................................................179
Figure 36: Survey Results for Q.28 .............................................................................................180
Figure 37: Survey Results for Q.29 .............................................................................................181
Figure 38: Survey Results for Q.30 .............................................................................................182
Figure 39: The New World Kirkpatrick Model ............................................................................213
Figure 40: Virtual Management Training Program Impact on Stakeholder Gap .........................231

1

Chapter One: Introduction
The problem of practice this study addressed is virtual employee burnout. The term
“employee burnout” refers to a state of weariness, pessimism, and inefficacy toward one’s job
(Bakker et al., 2014; Leiter & Maslach, 2017; Maslach et al., 2001). A 2019 study finding 76%
of U.S. employees experienced burnout at work demonstrates this is a problem (Gallup, Inc.,
2020). In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced an unprecedented number of
American workers into working from home (Brynjolfsson et al., 2020; Pew Research Center,
2020). While there are several personal and business benefits to remote work, there are also
challenges with virtual work arrangements that have exacerbated employee burnout (Felstead &
Henseke, 2017; Fukumura et al., 2021; Hayes et al., 2021). This problem is significant because
the World Health Organization (WHO, 2019) recently declared burnout an occupational
phenomenon in its global standard for diagnostic health in the International Classification of
Diseases. Left unexamined and unaddressed, virtual employee burnout will have wide-scale
negative impacts on American workers’ engagement, health, and well-being, triggering
detrimental second and third-order effects on the nation’s workforce capabilities, economic
systems, and social institutions (Barrero et al., 2021; Goh et al., 2016; Hirsch, 2021).
Organizational Context and Mission
The Adams County Purchasing Office (ACPO, a pseudonym) is a county government
agency responsible for the county’s procurement, contract compliance, and fixed asset
management. Located in the south-central region of the United States, ACPO’s work is critical to
ensuring ongoing county operations in one of the fastest-growing counties in the nation. All
county departments rely on this office to provide their requisite goods and services. In recent
years, the ACPO procured approximately $200 million in goods and services annually. County
2

departments supported include law enforcement, emergency services, health and human services,
corrections, courts, clerks, attorneys, human resources, information technology, facilities, tax
collection, parks and recreation, and transportation and natural resources. The office procures
goods and services ranging from helicopters for emergency services to general contractors for
multi-million-dollar infrastructure projects. It also maintains vendor contracts for all
departmental operations ranging from geophysical engineering services to office supplies.
The mission of ACPO is to support the needs of county departments to improve the
quality of life for taxpayers. As the central county for a large metropolitan area, Adams County
has approximately 1.5 million residents, with several thousand neighboring counties’ residents
commuting and working in it each day. With ACPO support, the departments are enabled to
serve residents by providing government infrastructure and civil services.
With approximately 50 staff members, ACPO consistently wins annual industry awards
for excellence in public sector procurement. It is overseen by a purchasing agent (PA) appointed
by the county purchasing board of directors. The current PA has worked for ACPO for over 20
years and has been the PA for approximately 5 years. She oversees ACPO with the help of her
management team. The directors and managers are responsible for functional teams, including
procurement, compliance, fixed assets, and operations. Additionally, a director oversees a
hallmark program to increase the county’s utilization of women- and minority-owned businesses.
Although these teams have specific domains, the office’s work requires them to be cross-
functional and collaborative with one another. The management team and staff are diverse and
reflect the county’s demographics. To keep pace with county growth and government services,
ACPO expanded its team by approximately 20% in the past 4 years.
3

Organizational Performance Status
The organizational performance problem at the root of this study is mitigating virtual
employee burnout at ACPO. The ongoing achievement of ACPO’s mission is contingent on
employees who are engaged, equipped, and committed to fulfilling the demands of their roles.
Burnout puts this mission at risk. In response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, ACPO
transitioned to a virtual staff in the spring of 2020. Like many management teams forced to
prioritize the health of their staff in this tumultuous time, the management team decided to close
their offices and continue operations with staff members working from home. Within a few
weeks, despite all staff being remote, it was apparent that virtual staff productivity was just as
high, if not higher, than with a co-located staff. Team members shared their gratitude for
working from home and initially commented on improved work/life balance since forfeiting their
commute. The gains in productivity and positive staff feedback inspired the ACPO management
team to consider a permanent transition to a virtual workforce. These considerations were further
magnified as county leadership realized the cost savings of county employees working from
home. Within a few months, the overseeing body of the county government began encouraging
department leaders, where possible, to transition staff to remote work.
By the summer of 2020, the ACPO management team informed all employees that they
could permanently work from home. The permanence of this decision was fortified by allowing
employees to relocate outside of commuting distance from county offices. Information and
communications technologies (ICT) were integrated to permanently support a distributed
workforce. The offices were occupied by those who had to be there, such as in the inventory
warehouse or those who elected a hybrid model of working partially from home and partially
from the office. By July 2020, 90% of ACPO staff was fully virtual.
4

However, the ACPO employee survey administered in April 2021 revealed the transition
to a virtual workforce created new challenges. While there were numerous personal and
professional advantages to virtual work, employees reported that the lines between work, home,
and recreation were increasingly blurred. They found themselves working longer, being more
stressed about work, and always being on. Staff members stated challenges posed by virtuality,
including social isolation and difficulty learning new systems and processes virtually. Of
concern, 22% stated their workload was unreasonable: a 5% increase from the prior year. The
theme of burnout emerged in staff interviews. Despite the advent of virtual work leading to more
work hours, employees did not propose returning to the office as a solution to mitigating
burnout. Most had grown to appreciate more time around family, increased schedule flexibility,
and the elimination of the daily commute. Virtual work was a conundrum; it included several
benefits employees coveted, but it also increased workload and burnout.
The ACPO is emblematic of organizations navigating the benefits and risks of virtual
staff. While virtual work is not new, its scale during and post-pandemic is unprecedented.
Addressing virtual employee burnout is a new challenge for managers and employees across the
globe. Due to the novelty of the problem, ACPO does not have a pre-existing strategy for
addressing it. Staff members are unaware of their performance addressing this problem, as they
are just realizing it exists. The analysis conducted in this study is the first attempt to empirically
diagnose the problem. The novelty of the problem necessitates innovative approaches and
strategies for mitigating it. This innovation study provided new insights for ACPO and other
organizations navigating the transition to a virtual workforce.
5

Related Literature
Virtual employee burnout is a relevant but relatively new topic of study (Qiu & Dauth,
2022; Raghuram et al., 2019). This review of the background of the problem will first highlight
scholarship on virtual work and employee burnout and then synthesize recent literature on this
topic.
Virtual work is one of several terms used for work performed away from a co-located
office (Sardeshmukh et al., 2012; Spreitzer et al., 2017). Other terms overlapping with virtual
work include telecommute, telework, remote work, work from home, distributed work, distance
work, flexible work, work anywhere, hybrid work, and alternate work schedule (Allen et al.,
2015; Wang et al., 2020). Although there is history and nuance to each of these terms, they are
used interchangeably for virtual work throughout this study, with clarification when necessary.
Based on reviews of the literature on virtual work, the definition of virtual work in this study is
work performed by persons for an organization outside of the organization’s physical offices
through the use of ICT (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007; Golden & Veiga, 2005; Makarius &
Larson, 2017; Nilles, 1994; Raghuram et al., 2019). Most remote work is performed at workers’
homes; however, ICT applications facilitate remote accessibility, colleague collaboration, and
output delivery from anywhere the applications can be leveraged (Gilson et al., 2015). While
virtual work has several organizational and personal benefits, its practice over the past few
decades has also revealed several correlates between virtual arrangements and employee burnout.
Employee burnout refers to a state of weariness, pessimism, and inefficacy toward one’s
job (Bakker et al., 2014; Leiter & Maslach, 2017). Often described as a syndrome, burnout is
initially caused by persistent work-related stressors and, over time, compromises employee well-
being, performance, and productivity (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Maslach et al., 2001). The
6

literature on employee burnout is often accompanied by scholarship on burnout’s antipode:
employee engagement (Maslach & Leiter, 2008b; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli et al.,
2002). Employee engagement refers to a positive state of mind toward one’s job accompanied by
a commitment to organizational success and a willingness to exert discretionary effort (Kahn,
1990; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli, 2013; Shuck et al., 2017). Indeed, theoretical frames,
strategies, and interventions to address burnout benefit from employee engagement
incorporations.
The job demands-resources model (JD-R) is one such research-based and research-tested
frame that aims to mitigate burnout with engagement considerations (Crawford et al., 2010;
Schaufeli et al., 2009). In the JD-R model’s seminal article, Demerouti et al. (2001) found that
irrespective of occupation, employee burnout is fostered in contexts where job demands are high
and employer-provided job resources are low. Demerouti et al. and subsequent researchers found
strong correlations between the exhaustion component of burnout and job demands and strong
correlations between disengagement and low job resources. Virtual workers face new job
demands, and staff at organizations that fail to resource virtual workers accordingly face an
elevated risk of virtual employee burnout.
Since the advent of virtual work, researchers and practitioners have recognized unique
stressors contributing to remote worker burnout. The recent proliferation of virtual work in
response to the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in virtual employee burnout becoming a global
challenge (Molino et al., 2020; Prasad et al., 2020; van Zoonen et al., 2021; Vyas & Butakhieo,
2021). Whereas organizations have traditionally been concerned about virtual workers’ personal
lives negatively impacting work quality, research finds an often-overlooked threat to
performance is the negative impact virtual work can have on workers’ personal lives (Barrero et
7

al., 2021; Basile & Beauregard, 2016; Wöhrmann & Ebner, 2021). Contrary to many managers’
anxieties about virtual employees’ performance, virtual work often increases employee
productivity because of teleworkers’ labor intensification (Kelliher & Anderson, 2010; Martin &
MacDonnell, 2012). Concurrently, prolonged periods of labor intensification, social isolation,
and more permeable boundaries between work and the rest of employees’ lives contribute to
sentiments of virtual employee burnout (Golden & Veiga, 2005; Jamal et al., 2021; Orhan et al.,
2016). The ramifications of this mass pivot to remote work will unfold in subsequent years, but
early indicators suggest we are, indeed, witnessing a coupling of increased productivity with
increased virtual employee burnout (Hirsch, 2021; Langley, 2021; Qiu & Dauth, 2022). ACPO is
a microcosm of a larger trend.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of virtual employee burnout is important to solve for a variety of reasons.
Employee burnout negatively impacts employees’ well-being, performance, and productivity;
unaddressed, a rising number of burned-out employees will result in ACPO’s inability to fulfill
its mission and implicit functions (Bakker et al., 2014; Leiter & Maslach, 2018). Failing to
mitigate employee burnout will also increase attrition rates (Podsakoff et al., 2007; Tuckey et al.,
2012). Unmitigated burnout spawns a vicious cycle. As burned-out employees disengage and
exit, previously engaged employees face an increased workload, heightening their exposure to
burnout, and the cycle continues (Bakker & Leiter, 2010). Virtuality has the potential to
exacerbate the burnout problem due to increased work intensification, digital fatigue, and
interruptions from home life (Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; Charalampous et al., 2022; Wöhrmann &
Ebner, 2021). As the pandemic persisted, U.S. workers resigned from their jobs at record levels
in what has been dubbed the Great Resignation; the exact reasons are under investigation, but
8

virtual employee burnout is one of the assumed variables (Chugh, 2021). The novelty, speed, and
scale of the transition to a distributed workforce is a transformation ACPO has been forced to
adopt. As the necessity and benefits of virtual work were embraced, the challenges of virtual
employee burnout also surfaced. Staff members communicated burnout sentiments, and some
staff turnover ensued. Not addressing this issue before it permeates the organizational culture
will critically compromise ACPO’s effectiveness and efficacy as it erodes ACPO’s greatest
asset: its people.
Organizational Performance SMART Goal
The organizational performance goal is that, by December 2024, all ACPO employees
will participate in an office-wide campaign to mitigate virtual employee burnout. Mitigating this
burnout is critical to staff fulfilling the office’s mission. The management team and an external
consultant developed this goal. The novelty and nature of this problem inform the benchmarking
of the goal. While virtual employee burnout is a new and growing phenomenon, there should be
no acceptable burnout rate at any organization. Virtual employees’ expanding demands and
schedules must be accompanied by tools and resources to mitigate burnout. The risk of burnout
cannot be eliminated, but it can be mitigated through an office-wide campaign that educates
employees about virtual burnout and equips them with best practices to combat it. Further,
ACPO employees need assurance that their managers are committed to cultivating an
organizational culture that mitigates virtual employee burnout. An office-wide campaign with
100% employee participation is a formidable step in addressing the problem. A participation goal
of less than 100% would compromise the campaign and produce suboptimal results. With 100%
participation, all staff will be educated on this type of burnout and invited into frank discussions
about their specific challenges and opportunities. A collective framing of the problem and
9

mitigation best practices will foster a unified approach. Managers will monitor their direct
reports’ participation to ensure 100% participation by the target date.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Three ACPO stakeholder groups able to impact the problem of practice are the PA, the
management team, and the non-management staff. The leader of ACPO is the PA. Appointed by
the county purchasing board, the PA is responsible for ACPO’s vision, mission, values,
operations, policies, procedures, human capital, and legal compliance. As an appointed official,
the PA has full authority to address ACPO organizational problems as she sees fit. She can
implement the virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign at whatever scale, scope, and
timeframe she deems appropriate. The management team consists of seven directors and
managers, along with the PA. Three directors report to the PA. The other four management team
members are managers who report to the directors. The team assists the PA with developing
ACPO’s strategic direction, leading functional teams’ execution of mission-critical roles and
responsibilities, cultivating the desired culture, and managing staff performance and
development. With the PA’s approval, the management team could ensure 100% staff
participation in the virtual burnout mitigation campaign and engage their direct reports on
challenges, opportunities, and best practices. Approximately 40 non-management staff members
are allocated to five functional teams. Although assigned to specific teams, non-management
staff often collaborate with other functional team members to accomplish deliverables and
office-wide initiatives. Non-management staff members are the frontline individuals who fulfill
management demands while attempting to manage their work and life from home. The
campaign’s objective is to mitigate their burnout.
10

Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to achieving the overall
organizational goal of 100% participation in a campaign to mitigate virtual employee burnout,
the ACPO management team was the stakeholder of focus for this study. The ACPO non-
management staff are the stakeholder group closest to the epicenter of power to enact the most
change on their virtual burnout; however, their efforts will be stifled if management
preconditions for addressing this problem are not first satisfied. This determination was made by
considering ACPO’s internal accountability dynamics.
Epistemological accountability explores the operationalized mechanisms leveraged
within individual relationships, organizations, and societies for social coordination. Through the
exercise of judgment and choice, given shared decision rights, values, and information, agents
enact arrangements through which they are accountable for processes, outcomes, or a
combination thereof (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004; Murphy & Skillen, 2015; Tetlock et al.,
2013). Power dynamics are revealed in accountability binaries composed of directors and
providers (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). As in any sub-system, ACPO has accountability
binaries that frame productivity and problem solving. Further, Romzek and Dubnick (1987)
described four types of accountability systems: bureaucratic, legal, professional, and political. As
a hierarchical, heavily regulated local government procurement office, ACPO is primarily a
bureaucratic accountability type. In the bureaucratic type, the accountability binary is between
the supervisor and subordinate, and the basis of the relationship is supervision. Considering
Hentschke and Wohlstetter’s (2004) five accountability binary challenges, the management team
has the greatest ability to mitigate adverse selection, align objectives, strengthen incentives,
ensure information symmetry, and affirm decision rights.
11

The enacted accountability arrangements support the conclusion that the management
team is the stakeholder group with the most power to facilitate sustainable change by meeting
management preconditions for addressing the problem of focus before implementing the office-
wide campaign. The stakeholder group’s goal is that, by May 2024, all ACPO managers will
meet the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout by 100%. The gap is
100% because this is a new organizational goal. Management preconditions include being
educated, supported, and resourced to address this issue with team members and with the
organization as a structural whole. If the management team does not accomplish this goal before
the non-management staff members engage in the office-wide campaign, there is a high risk of a
failed campaign due to managers not having prior essential knowledge about virtual employee
burnout, lacking the motivation to engage their staff on the issue, and not having the proper
organizational supports to equip the staff. Table 1 outlines the ACPO mission, organizational
performance goal, and aligned stakeholder performance goal.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Aligned Stakeholder
Performance Goal
Organizational mission
Support the needs of county departments to improve the quality of life for County taxpayers
Organizational performance goal
By December 2024, 100% of employees will participate in an office-wide campaign to
mitigate virtual employee burnout
Stakeholder group performance goal
By May 2024, 100% of ACPO managers will meet the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout by 100%

12

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this innovation study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for ACPO managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal of meeting the management preconditions for reducing virtual
employee burnout by 100% by May 2024. The analysis commenced by generating a list of
assumed influences for ACPO managers to accomplish this goal and then systematically
examined the influences to ascertain which influences were needs and which were assets. While
a complete analysis would have focused on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the
stakeholder of focus in this analysis was the ACPO management team.
The research questions that guided this needs analysis study were
1. What are the ACPO management team’s knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs related to meeting the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions?
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis, a systematic analytical method that helps to clarify
organizational goals and identify the gap between actual and preferred performance levels within
an organization, was adapted to an innovation model and implemented as the conceptual
framework. The innovation model was leveraged to identify and examine ACPO managers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs to reach their performance goal related to
achieving management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout. Assumed
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact stakeholder capacity were
13

generated based on context-specific research and general learning and motivation theory. These
influences were explored by a mixed-methods study using surveys, interviews, and document
analysis. Research-based solutions are recommended and evaluated comprehensively.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about virtual employee burnout.
The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders, as well as the initial concepts of a gap
analysis adapted to a needs analysis, were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of the
literature surrounding the scope of the study. Chapter Two will discuss the literature on virtual
work, burnout, engagement, and management best practices for addressing these phenomena as
individual constructs. The combined phenomenon of virtual employee burnout is still a nascent
topic of study; however, elements of the respective constructs are weaved together to propose a
frame for understanding and addressing the aggregate phenomenon. Chapter Two also further
discusses the innovation model conceptual framework adapted from Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap
analysis and outlines ACPO managers’ assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences to meet their stakeholder goal. Chapter Three describes the methodology for
investigating these influences as it relates to the choice of participants, data collection, and
analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed to determine which
influences were needs and which were assets. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and
literature, for addressing the needs and leveraging the assets to close the perceived gaps, as well
as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

14

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter provides a review of the relevant literature on management preconditions for
mitigating virtual employee burnout. The nascence of the literature on this topic as a unified
construct prompted reviews of virtual work and burnout as individual constructs, followed by a
literature-based proposed conceptual approach for understanding this topic. Similarly, due to the
nascence of literature on management best practices for virtual employee burnout as a unified
construct, the literature on management best practices for managing virtual workers and
management best practices for managing burnout were also reviewed separately. A literature-
based conceptual approach for understanding management best practices for managing this issue
is then proposed. The final section reviews Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis conceptual
framework, which was leveraged in this study to assess and address knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on ACPO managers’ ability to meet their stakeholder goal of meeting
management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Virtual Work
The term “virtual work” refers to work performed outside of an organization’s physical
offices (Sardeshmukh et al., 2012; Spreitzer et al., 2017). The literature on virtual work mentions
numerous terms in recent history to describe this work context: telecommute, telework, remote
work, work from home, distributed work, distance work, flexible work, work anywhere, hybrid
work, and alternate work schedule (Sako, 2021; Wang et al., 2020). Although some meta-
analyses of the literature depict slight variance in term definitions, these terms are used
interchangeably in this study to refer to virtual work (Allen et al., 2015). Based on reviews of the
literature on virtual work, the definition of virtual work in this study is work performed by
persons for an organization outside of the organization’s physical offices through the use of ICT
15

(Gajendran & Harrison, 2007; Golden & Veiga, 2005; Makarius & Larson, 2017; Nilles, 1994;
Raghuram et al., 2019). Most remote work is performed at workers’ homes; however, ICT
applications facilitate remote accessibility, colleague collaboration, and output delivery from any
location where the applications can be leveraged (Gilson et al., 2015). This section will discuss
virtual work’s growth, benefits, and challenges.
The Growth of Virtual Work
The first term referring to virtual work, telecommuting, was introduced in the literature
landscape by Jack Nilles (1975). As a communications systems expert for the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Nilles realized the work design capabilities afforded by
emerging ICT and envisioned a future where certain knowledge workers could work from any
location where they could securely access the necessary ICT applications. In the early years of
the practice, telework was viewed by the majority of employees as a privilege that bestowed
increased flexibility and work-life balance; yet it was generally permitted or disallowed at the
behest of managers who favorably or unfavorably considered the risk of decreased employee
productivity caused by factors including reduced supervision and increased home-work
interference (Avery & Zabel, 2001; Bailey & Kurland, 2002; Nilles, 1994). Despite some
trepidation about remote working arrangements, the number of home-based teleworkers almost
doubled between 1980 and 2000, growing from less than 2.2 million to approximately 4.2
million (Oettinger, 2011). By 2019, 5.7 million Americans (4.7% of the U.S. workforce) were
estimated to telecommute half-time or more (GWA, 2021). The primary contributor to the
growth of virtual work in this period was ICT; a year later, in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic
would forever change the scale and scope of virtual work.

16

Information and Communications Technology
Information and communications technology (ICT) applications catalyzed virtual work
by making it possible for virtual workers to communicate and collaborate with colleagues on
organizational outcomes and outputs. The evolution of ICT applications from the fax machine to
the internet, to email, to mobile phones, to enterprise software, to videoconferencing, and dozens
of other applications highlight the impact of ICT on not just how business is done but the nature
of business itself (Cascio & Montealegre, 2016; Gilson et al., 2015). Almost 5 decades since the
emergence of virtual work, ICT continues to be the primary enabler behind the proliferation of
virtual work (Messenger & Gschwind, 2016). Kizza (2007) pointed out that one of the most
dynamic impacts of ICT applications in a global economy is the ability for professionals to work
with and for each other anywhere in the world. In an age of rapid digitization through
technologies such as cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and augmented reality, ICT
applications continue to facilitate new business models and are critical levers for organizational
effectiveness and competitive advantage (Bonnet & Westerman, 2021). In a report on the impact
of the digital revolution on the future of work, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD, 2018) emphasized the necessity of digital skills for the near and distant
future. These digital skills, among other proficiencies, enable workers to be effective virtual
workers. While the evolution of ICT applications and the growth of virtual work rapidly
transformed the global economy and the nature of work, the world was not prepared for the
largest catalyst of digital transformation ever experienced.
COVID-19 Pandemic
According to Global Workplace Analytics (GWA, 2021), the COVID-19 pandemic
catapulted 69% of American employees into working from home at the peak of the pandemic in
17

late spring 2020. In a national study conducted almost 2 years later, in January 2022, 59% of
American workers who could telework chose to work remotely, even if their offices were open
(Parker et al., 2022). Researchers in this study also found that the primary reason for
telecommuting was not health concerns or childcare; for 76% of workers choosing to work
remotely, the primary reason was that they preferred working remotely. Conducting 19 monthly
waves of surveys encompassing 78,000 participants, Barrero et al. (2021) estimated 28% of U.S
workdays will be performed remotely post-pandemic. The majority of work will return to co-
located spaces of business; however, a significant contingent of knowledge workers and
managers will continue to leverage remote contexts (Brynjolfsson et al., 2020). While some
retraction from peak-pandemic highs is expected, with 37% of U.S jobs able to be performed
remotely and the majority of American workers wanting the option to work virtually, the
elevated scale and scope of virtual work is a new normal (Bick et al., 2020; Courtney, 2021;
Dingel & Neiman, 2020). The OECD’s (2020) encouragement to member governments to create
policies and make long-term infrastructure investments in virtual work capabilities is further
evidence of the permanence of large-scale virtual work. Millions of workers have pivoted to
virtual work for the first time, or on an unprecedented personal scale, and have experienced
various benefits and challenges of virtual work.
Benefits and Challenges of Virtual Work
The employee experience of virtual work is complex and moderated by several factors.
An early literature review on the experience of virtual workers revealed that while virtual
workers relished in benefits such as increased flexibility and the absence of a commute, they also
encountered unforeseen challenges such as work extensification and intensification (Haddon &
Lewis, 1994). The persistent tensions between the benefits and challenges of virtual work were
18

also reflected in a joint 2017 report by the United Nations’ International Labor Organization and
the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Messenger et
al., 2017). This section will overview several of the benefits and challenges of virtual work,
respectively.
Benefits of Virtual Work
The desire of most American workers to work remotely, at least some of the time, implies
there are some universal benefits to virtual work. Gajendran and Harrison (2007) conducted a
meta-analysis of 46 studies involving 12,883 employees and concluded that telecommuting had
mainly beneficial effects on outcomes such as perceived autonomy, lower work-family conflict,
and increased productivity. This section will review four benefits of virtual work from the
literature: (a) autonomy, (b) reduced work-home conflict, (c) higher productivity, and (d) health
and well-being benefits.
Autonomy. Autonomy refers to the extent to which employees can exercise control over
how their work is performed (Langfred, 2000). Perceived autonomy, whether in virtual or co-
located contexts, is a positive correlate of job satisfaction, engagement, and performance (Bakaç
et al., 2021; Bakker & Costa, 2104; Nesheim et al., 2017). A driver of the increased perception
of autonomy is a validated assumption that virtual work arrangements can provide enhanced
flexibility within work activities and between work and other life demands (Kelliher &
Anderson, 2010; Mann & Holdsworth, 2003; Spreitzer et al., 2017). Virtual workers’ enhanced
perception of autonomy is, indeed, a benefit of virtual work arrangements. Gajendran and
Harrison (2007) found that autonomy was a critical moderator in the relationship between
telecommuters and job satisfaction. In another study involving a sample of 927 employees from
different sectors, De Spiegelaere et al. (2016) found employee autonomy was bivariantly related
19

to higher levels of work engagement and innovative work behavior. Additionally, in a separate
study conducted through a meta-analysis of work-family conflict, researchers showed that a
perceived high level of autonomy was negatively related to work-family conflict (Liao et al.,
2019). The prospect of reduced work-family conflict is also a benefit of virtual work.
Reduced Work-Family Conflict. Virtual work can have a positive correlation to
reduced work-life conflict. In the early years of remote work, virtual work contexts were
sometimes referred to as family-friendly work arrangements as they were thought to enhance
work-life balance and reduce work-life conflict (Crosbie & Moore, 2004; Felstead et al., 2002).
This sentiment has persisted through time, as in the sixth edition of the European Working
Conditions Survey encompassing 44,000 interviewees across 35 countries, 86% of respondents
cited reduced work-life conflict as an important reason for working remotely (Messenger et al.,
2017). Reduced work-life conflict was the top reason for desiring flexible work arrangements in
the survey. Researchers have, indeed, found positive correlations between virtual work and
reduced work-life conflict (Mudrak et al., 2018; Sullivan, 2012). Gajendran and Harrison (2007)
deduced that working virtually more than 2.5 days a week amplified virtual work’s beneficial
effects on work-family conflict. While remote work may reduce work-life conflict, one of
employers’ primary concerns is the relationship between virtual work and employee
productivity.
Increased Productivity. For virtual work arrangements to be sustainable, both
employers and employees must acknowledge stable or improved productivity. Although
compromised productivity is one of the chief concerns of managers, several studies have found
remote workers to be more productive than their office-based colleagues (Beauregard & Henry,
2009; Sánchez et al., 2007). In a cross-sectional study performed during the COVID-19
20

pandemic, Galanti et al. (2021) surveyed 209 virtual workers to investigate correlates of
productivity and found positive relations between self-leadership, autonomy, and virtual worker
productivity. Another comparative study involving 89 virtual workers and 103 office-based
workers found high-intensity teleworkers appeared to benefit from the eradication of office-
based phenomena, including unnecessary meetings, interruptions, spontaneous information,
colleague interruptions, in-person political maneuvering, and other events that interfered with
productivity (Fonner & Roloff, 2010). Further, in one of the first randomized experiments on
working from home, Bloom et al. (2015) concluded that home-working led to a 13% increase in
performance attributed to a 9% increase in working time due to fewer breaks and sick days and a
4% increase in efficiency attributed to a quieter and more conducive working contexts. Bloom et
al.’s (2015) connection to fewer sick days alludes to the possible health and well-being benefits
of virtual work.
Health and Well-Being Benefits. The health and well-being of employees are central to
positive organizational and individual outcomes, as healthy employees have the ability and
energy to be physically, mentally, and emotionally engaged in their work. In a literature review
of technology-driven changes and well-being, Johnson et al. (2020) outlined positive health
impacts of virtual work, including replacing commute time with rest and exercise, improved
workplace safety, more time with loved ones, and improved work-family schedule alignment.
Sardeshmukh et al.’s (2012) finding that telework is negatively related to exhaustion implies that
telework may be associated with fewer occupational health impairments than in-office contexts.
Further, organizations that are supportive of flexible work arrangements reduce virtual workers’
psychological strain, enabling increased engagement and retention (Timms et al., 2015).

21

Challenges of Virtual Work
As virtual work has grown over the decades, and especially as it proliferated during the
COVID-19 pandemic, virtual workers realized the benefits of telecommuting were also met with
their own set of challenges. In a broad literature review with several contributors from the fields
of work and organizational psychology, Kniffin et al. (2021) outlined the implications of
pandemic-influenced changes in work practices. The concerns expressed in their review were
centered on the implications of virtual work, including social isolation, increased work-home
conflict, and work extensification. These concerns were consistent with explanations in the
literature that the benefits of virtual work came at a cost (Allen et al., 2015; Avery & Zabel,
2001; Bailey & Kurland, 2002; Raghuram et al., 2019). This section will review seven
challenges of virtual work derived from literature: (a) work intensification and extensification,
(b) increased work-home conflict, (c) social isolation, (d) ICT challenges, (e) career challenges,
(f) virtual team challenges, and (g) health and well-being challenges.
Work Intensification and Extensification. Work intensification refers to compression
of work requiring increased physical and cognitive effort in a reduced timespan; work
extensification refers to working longer timespans. Virtual workers experience work
intensification and extensification as they have a harder time detaching from work during
standard working hours and non-standard working hours such as nights and weekends (Allen et
al., 2015; Glass & Noonan, 2016; Qiu & Dauth, 2022). One reason for work intensification and
extensification is that ICT applications and mobile devices, such as laptops and smartphones,
that facilitate remote work also facilitate the capability to work at any time (Perlow, 2012). In a
study using structural equation modeling to consider the relations between ICT use and
employee strain and distress, Chesley (2014) analyzed data from 2,556 respondents of the
22

National Study on the Changing Workforce and found that ICT use was indeed related to work
intensification (faster work pace, increased interruptions, increased multitasking), which
increased employee strain and distress. Since virtual work is, by definition, contingent on the use
of ICT devices and applications, virtual workers are likely to experience this work intensification
to a higher degree than their in-office colleagues.
Felstead and Henseke (2017) explained a second reason for increased virtual worker
output using social exchange theory to study telecommuters. Performing a trend analysis from a
national data set, they deduced that one motivation for virtual workers’ increased work output
was to prolong their capitalization of virtual work benefits by displaying the efficacy of virtual
work through increased productivity, thereby facilitating an exchange of increased productivity
for increased autonomy and flexibility. A third reason for work intensification and
extensification is increased permeability between work and home. Researchers within boundary
management, a field of study within work-life research, have highlighted the enhanced
challenges remote workers face because of increased porosity between work and home,
including the eradication of spatial delineations (Delanoeije et al., 2019; Hartig et al., 2007).
Increased Work-Home Conflict. Virtual work has the potential to both reduce and
increase work-home conflict. In a meta-analysis to explore the relationship between a flexible
work arrangement and work-family conflict, Allen et al. (2013) concluded that the potential for
flexible work arrangements to reduce work-family conflict is limited. The work intensification
and extensification associated with virtual work impact the quantity and quality of time with
loved ones and could increase work-home conflict (Liao et al., 2019; Ojala et al., 2014).
Analyzing data from 15,035 employees, Sarbu (2018) explored the relationship between
telecommuting and work-family conflict and found that virtual work makes it more challenging
23

to resolve personal and professional conflicts. One reason for the increased challenge is that
virtual workers who work from home attempt to simultaneously manage work and home
responsibilities, and neither home nor work has their respective sense of spatial or temporal
context (Cameron & Fox, 2011). The negative impacts of interruptions and distractions can flow
from work to family, and family to work, creating dissonance and stress between the two
dimensions; additionally, time devoted to one is time taken away from the other, creating a tug-
of-war effect (Golden et al., 2006; ten Brummelhuis et al., 2012).
The efforts of different demographic groups to reduce work-home conflict also reveal
inequities among virtual workers. Several studies have investigated the virtual work experience
for demographic groups, including women, mothers, fathers, seniors, and the disabled (Anderson
et al., 2001; Feng & Savani, 2020; Graham et al., 2021; Hilbrecht et al., 2008; Marsh & Musson,
2008; Rudolph & Baltes, 2017; Sharit et al., 2009). Other studies have explored the virtual work
experience of different generations, personality types, and professional levels (Clark et al., 2012;
Leslie et al., 2012; Mahmoud et al., 2021). These studies revealed nuance and unique challenges
in each group’s virtual work experience. The group with the most work-home conflict associated
with virtual work was mothers. This conflict was due to gender and parenting norms associated
with mothers performing a disproportionate amount of household and childcare responsibilities
at home while attempting to work (Johnson et al., 2007; Lyttelton et al., 2022; Troup & Rose,
2012; Wheatley, 2012).
Social Isolation. Social isolation in the context of the workplace refers to the sentiment
of feeling disconnected from colleagues. Virtual workers experience feelings of social isolation
to a greater extent than in-office workers by virtue of being geographically separated and having
communications moderated by ICT applications (Golden & Veiga, 2005; Orhan et al., 2016). In
24

a study involving 294 telecommuters, Golden (2006a) examined the relationship between virtual
work and job satisfaction by investigating how virtual work affected colleague relationships.
Golden found that the elimination of in-person communication, inclusive of spontaneity,
physical touch, body language, and face-to-face cues relaying subtle emotions, eroded
relationships. Further, in virtual contexts, relationships with colleagues are more undermined
than relationships with managers, mitigating the buffering impact of close professional
relationships in fostering organizational loyalty, especially when manager relationships are
strained (Golden, 2006b). Social isolation thereby reduces organizational commitment and
increases the likelihood of disengagement (Charalampous et al., 2019; de Vries et al., 2019).
Studies on virtual worker social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic also reflected the
negative impacts of physical and psychological isolation on virtual worker productivity and
engagement (Galanti et al., 2021; van Zoonen et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2020).
Information and Communications Technology Challenges. While a facilitator of
virtual work, ICT devices and applications have inherent challenges for workers learning and
leveraging them daily. Gilson et al.’s (2015) meta-analysis illuminated the complexity of
technology as both an enabler and a hindrance in the functioning of virtual teams. Virtual
employees can experience technology-related setbacks associated with constantly engaging and
adopting multiple applications to perform their jobs (Kane et al., 2019). Virtual workers also
experience strain due to incessant accessibility, information overload, and over-collaboration
fostered by ICT applications (Ellwart et al., 2015; Molino et al., 2020). An empirical study with
306 employees showed that ICT usage caused exhaustion because of technology-related stressors
such as techno-induced increases in workload, role ambiguity, privacy invasion, work-home
conflict, and job insecurity (Maier et al., 2015). These devices and applications are not just
25

changing how work is performed; they have also transformed and are constantly transforming
the nature of work (Cascio & Montealegre, 2016; Colbert et al., 2016). The rapid integration of
technological advances, including artificial intelligence, automation, and augmented reality is a
cause of concern for many workers who are confronted with the need to upskill or reskill;
additionally, many workers, including virtual workers, are stressed about their jobs being
subsumed by new technologies (Brougham & Haar, 2018; Johnson et al., 2020; McClure, 2018;
OECD, 2018).
Career Challenges. Remote work can be associated with career stagnation. In a
systematic literature review of remote workers’ well-being encompassing 63 studies involving
37,553 virtual workers, Charalampous et al. (2019) found that remote workers may perceive their
physical isolation as a threat to career advancement. Indeed, managers’ perceptions of remote
employees’ work habits can impact career progression, and managers’ failure to affirm remote
workers can result in virtual employee insecurity (Barsness et al., 2005; Leslie et al., 2012).
Virtual workers’ inability to leverage in-office visibility, spontaneity, humor, and political savvy
to establish likability and organizational identity could compromise opportunities to make
positive impressions and earn respect (Bartel et al., 2012). Organizations without performance
management and career path guidance to reassure and reward remote workers risk cultivating an
environment of less-than-optimal engagement (Maruyama & Tietze, 2012).
Virtual Team Challenges. In addition to the challenges in-office teams face, virtuality in
geographically distributed teams creates particular challenges to team collaboration and
cohesion. Meta-analyses of virtual teams confirmed trust and communication to be two key
issues for virtual teams (Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; Breuer et al., 2016; Gilson et al., 2015;
Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020). Lippert and Dulewicz (2018) validated trustworthiness as the
26

predominant construct of team effectiveness in a study involving 108 virtual teams. Another
study using structural equation modeling to analyze responses from 388 workers across diverse
virtual teams confirmed that trust and cohesion were two key psychological mechanisms related
to team psychosocial factors and work outcomes (Lu, 2015). In a multidisciplinary review of
trust in virtual teams, Hacker et al. (2019) summarized that trust and cohesion are impacted by
poor leadership, matrixed multi-team organizational designs, work-life conflict, and confusion
around new technologies.
Health and Well-Being Challenges. The health and well-being challenges associated
with virtual work are both physiological and psychological. In a literature review on the health
impacts of telework, Tavares (2017) distills virtual work’s negative health effects into three
categories: musculoskeletal issues; stress- and overwork-induced conditions such as
cardiovascular, metabolic, and gastrointestinal problems; and stress- and overwork-induced
mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety. Other literature reviews have also
attempted to outline possible negative health impacts and determined similar categories (Allen et
al., 2015; Charalampous et al., 2019; Johnson et al., 2020). Of concern, virtual workers
potentially engage in increased sedentary screen time due to work extensification and run the risk
of experiencing the health problems associated with elevated sedentary behavior, including
cardiovascular issues, diabetes, insomnia, and musculoskeletal conditions (Madhav et al., 2017;
Waters et al., 2016; Wilmot et al., 2012; Yang et al., 2017). Further, findings of virtual workers
experiencing greater stress levels than in-office workers mean virtual workers potentially face
greater risks of stress-induced conditions such as anxiety and depression (Heiden et al., 2020;
Song & Gao, 2019). In a path analysis of telework’s effects on employees’ psychosomatic health
complaints using large-scale data, Wöhrmann and Ebner (2021) found indirect relationships
27

between virtual work and employees’ psychosomatic health complaints were moderated by
working conditions, including schedule control, time pressure, boundaryless working hours,
coworker relationships, and disturbances and interruptions.
Conclusion
In this study, virtual work is synonymous with telecommuting, teleworking, and working
remotely. It refers to employees working outside of their employers’ physical offices. Enabled by
ICT devices and applications, virtual work emerged in practice and literature in the last quarter
of the 20th century. Over the past 5 decades, ICT advances have further facilitated an ever-
growing trend toward virtual work options. Virtual work experienced an unprecedented surge in
2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns forced most of the workforce into remote work
contexts, an arrangement that most Americans would like to continue post-pandemic, if even on
a part-time basis. Virtual work arrangements are hailed for perceived employee benefits,
including greater autonomy, reduced work-home conflict, and higher employee productivity. The
practice of virtual work, however, surfaces virtual employee challenges, including work
intensification and extensification, increased work-home conflict, social isolation, technology-
related challenges, career challenges, and virtual team challenges. As virtual work has
proliferated throughout most of the American workforce, the tensions between the perceived
benefits and existential challenges have resulted in a complex employee well-being experience.
Benefits such as eradicating a daily commute are obvious, but the impacts of challenges,
including longer work hours and increased work-home conflict, are hard to quantify. As virtual
work has persisted, a term from in-office contexts has traveled into virtual contexts to describe
what many employees are feeling: burnout.
28

Burnout
The WHO first included burnout syndrome in the 10th edition of the International
Classification of Diseases for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics (ICD-10); in the eleventh
edition, published in 2019, the section on burnout was expanded (WHO, 2019). The ICD-11
entry defined burnout as a syndrome caused by chronic workplace stress that has not been
successfully managed. The three main dimensions of burnout are described as (a) feelings of
energy depletion or exhaustion; (b) increased mental distance from one’s job, or feelings of
negativism or cynicism related to one’s job; and (c) a sense of ineffectiveness and lack of
accomplishment. The point is also made that burnout refers specifically to phenomena in the
occupational context and should not be applied to describe experiences in other areas of life.
In a 2019 survey of the American workforce, 76% of respondents reported experiencing
burnout on the job (Gallup, Inc., 2020). This survey further found that of those who very often or
always experience burnout, 63% were more likely to take a sick day, and they were almost three
times more likely to be searching for a new job. Burnout syndrome is a growing phenomenon
with significant impacts. Although burnout is described as an occupational phenomenon by the
WHO, its impact transcends the workplace. Within the workplace, burnout could negatively
impact several human capital components, including performance, job satisfaction, absenteeism,
engagement, organizational citizenship, team cohesion, and turnover (Alarcon, 2011; Bakker et
al., 2014; Leiter & Maslach, 2017). Beyond the workplace, burnout can affect employees’
physical health, mental health, and family and interpersonal relationships (Hammer et al., 2016;
Montano et al., 2017). Addressing burnout is not only significant for organizational purposes but
also imperative for overall employee well-being. This section will discuss the evolution of
research to define and frame burnout, the relationship between burnout and engagement, and
29

review the two dominant burnout models found in the literature: the areas of worklife (AW)
model and the JD-R.
Defining Burnout
Freudenberger (1974) coined the term “burnout” to describe volunteer workers’
emotional exhaustion and motivational dissipation as they served aid-oriented organizations.
Volunteers who were once engaged and committed to the mission, over time, displayed a loss of
energy, enthusiasm, and dedication. Freudenberger referred to this gradual process of mental,
emotional, and physical fatigue as staff burnout. Subsequently, Maslach and Jackson (1981)
published a seminal article on burnout, describing burnout as a psychological syndrome
involving a prolonged response to chronic job stressors. In their study of human-service workers,
they summarized workers’ experiences of burnout into three categories: feelings of exhaustion,
negative attitudes toward clients, and insecurity around their competence (Maslach & Jackson,
1981). That same year, Maslach and Jackson published the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), a
multidimensional psychometric diagnostic instrument designed around three burnout
dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment (Maslach,
1998; Maslach & Jackson, 1981).
The three burnout dimensions reflected the personal experience of burnout for human-
service providers such as health care workers and teachers. Emotional exhaustion reflected
feelings of overextension and exhaustion caused by excessive and prolonged emotional demands,
depersonalization referred to cynicism and detachment from work beneficiaries, and reduced
personal accomplishment described the sense of diminished efficacy burnt-out employees feel
toward their roles and objectives (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). As these dimensions were
leveraged to explore burnout in subsequent years, they were expanded beyond the scope of
30

human-service providers to encompass multiple forms of work (Maslach, 1998; Demerouti et al.,
2001). The three burnout dimensions evolved into more generalized themes of exhaustion,
cynicism, and reduced professional efficacy (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). In addition to occupation-
specific diagnostics, a new Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) was also
introduced for administration to non-human-service workers (Schaufeli et al., 2002). Exhaustion
expanded beyond the emotional component to capture several elements of individual stress,
energy loss, and fatigue; cynicism transcended the people aspect of depersonalization to capture
detachment, indifference, and withdrawal from work itself; and reduced efficacy went beyond
personal accomplishment to depict minimized productivity and achievement (Leiter & Maslach,
2017). As seen in the WHO’s 2019 ICD-11 description of burnout, Maslach and her colleagues’
work became ubiquitous with public discourse on burnout.
As the predominant theory on burnout, Maslach and colleagues’ multidimensional
framework catalyzed other attempts to define and frame burnout. Halbesleben and Demerouti
(2005) developed the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), prioritizing the dimensions of
exhaustion and disengagement. The Shirom-Melamed Burnout Questionnaire considered
physical fatigue, emotional exhaustion, and cognitive weariness (Shirom & Melamed, 2005). In
their Bergen Burnout Inventory, Feldt et al. (2014) proposed refining the MBI’s three
dimensions to exhaustion at work, cynicism toward the meaning of work, and a sense of
inadequacy at work. One of the main critiques of the MBI was the relation of the third
dimension, professional efficacy, with burnout.
Critics of the MBI inventories purport that the two dimensions of exhaustion and
cynicism are sufficient for constituting burnout; while professional efficacy is loosely related to
burnout syndrome, they state it should not be included in its foundational framing. In their meta-
31

analysis of burnout, Lee and Ashforth (1996) found professional efficacy developed
independently of exhaustion and cynicism, and professional efficacy was not highly related to
their study’s burnout correlates. The MBI inventories’ burnout measurement deduced through
high rates of exhaustion and cynicism, but low rates of professional efficacy, is further evidence
of the weak relationship between professional efficacy and burnout (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
In their justification for developing the OLBI, Demerouti et al. (2001) stated that removing
professional efficacy not only focused on the core dimensions of burnout, it also removed a
psychometric evaluation flaw of the MBI-GS by having a positive to negative scale for
exhaustion and cynicism instead of solely negative scales for these two dimensions in the MBI-
GS accompanied by a solely positive scale for professional efficacy. For the designers of the
OLBI, professional efficacy was not related to burnout; however, it had a relationship to another
important construct: engagement (Crawford et al., 2010).
The Relationship Between Burnout and Engagement
Work engagement refers to a positive disposition of high energy along with high levels of
dedication and a strong work focus (Bakker & Albrecht, 2018). Generally perceived as the
positive antipode to burnout, the research on and relevance of engagement have grown in recent
years (Bakker et al., 2014). Cultivating engagement is a growing management and human
resource focus thought to drive performance and organizational objectives (Bedarkar & Pandita,
2014; Guest, 2013). To this goal, organizations have increasingly invested in knowledge sharing
and technological platforms to optimize engagement (Al Mehrzi & Singh, 2016; Juan et al.,
2018). Despite these efforts, maintaining desirable levels of engagement has been a challenge. In
a Gallup 2021 study involving 57,022 full and part-time American workers, 34% of respondents
felt engaged at work, and 16% reported being actively disengaged (Harter, 2022). These results
32

present the first decline in the Gallup survey’s annual engagement measure in a decade. A review
of the dominant engagement conceptualizations is beneficial to framing the relationship between
burnout and engagement.
Diagnostic and prescriptive inquiry into burnout has often included discussions on
engagement. Likewise, research on burnout has produced a virtuous cycle of research on
engagement (Bakker et al., 2008). Kahn (1990) is one of the first researchers to explore a
theoretical framing of employee engagement; he referred to engagement as employees
identifying with their work and expressing themselves through investing their physical,
cognitive, emotional, and mental energies. According to Kahn (1992), engagement produced
positive outcomes on the employee level, including personal growth and desired organizational
outcomes such as increased productivity. Building on Kahn’s work, Rothbard’s (2001) study on
employee enrichment and depletion described two dimensions of engagement: attention and
absorption. Shuck et al. (2017) described employee engagement as the positive psychological
state operationalized by cognitive, emotional, and behavioral energy. Maslach and Leiter viewed
engagement as merely the positive opposite of burnout; low burnout scores on the MBI were a
measure of high engagement (Leiter & Maslach, 2003; Maslach & Leiter, 2008a). In this
framing, engagement is inferred through employee energy, involvement, and efficacy: the
opposing ends on a theoretical spectrum of the three burnout dimensions of exhaustion,
cynicism, and inefficacy (Maslach, 1998). As the MBI became the predominant measure of
burnout, the theoretical framing of engagement as simply the opposite of burnout, with one
diagnostic instrument, was insufficient for some researchers.
Although Maslach’s definition and measurement of engagement were efficiently
connected to burnout, the framing essentially posited that burnout and engagement are
33

complementary (Maslach, 1998). Other researchers performing confirmatory factor analyses
with large sample sizes posited that burnout and engagement, while having a negatively
correlated relationship, should be treated and measured as independent constructs (González-
Romá et al., 2006; Schaufeli et al., 2002). A new definition of work engagement was proposed as
a positive, fulfilling, work-related mindset inclusive of vigor, dedication, and absorption
(Schaufeli et al., 2002). Vigor was defined as directing high energy and resilience toward one’s
work, dedication characterized high involvement and work-related significance, and absorption
captured a sense of engrossing concentration and captivating focus (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010).
Crossmatching Maslach and Leiter (1997) with this framing of engagement, vigor was at the
opposing end of an energy spectrum with exhaustion, and dedication was at the opposing end of
an identification spectrum with cynicism; absorption was considered an enhancement to the
engagement conceptualization and not put on a continuum with efficacy (González-Romá et al.,
2006). This framing of engagement with underlying dimensions of energy and identification and
scales of vigor, dedication, and absorption further led to the development of a new engagement
diagnostic instrument.
The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) was developed to evaluate engagement as
its own separate and distinct positive construct (Schaufeli, 2013). Rather than defining
engagement as the absence of burnout, the UWES was interested in investigating environments
and dispositions where workers flourished (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017). Since its introduction,
the UWES has become one of the world’s leading engagement measures (Farndale et al., 2014).
In multiple cross-national studies, the UWES has demonstrated factorial validity and invariance,
along with internal consistency and stability, and construct validity (Schaufeli, 2013). The
original UWES contained 17 items and has subsequently been condensed into short and ultra-
34

short versions with nine and three items, respectively (Schaufeli et al., 2019). As a valid and
reliable work engagement measure, the UWES affirms engagement as an independent construct
that can be measured and addressed distinct from burnout.
The categorization and establishment of the negative correlation between the two
constructs of burnout and engagement undergird the value of understanding, evaluating, and
addressing each in an organizational context. Expanding on the theoretical lenses of burnout and
engagement, researchers began to conceptualize frameworks that accounted for organizational
correlates of both (Lu et al., 2017; Masluk et al., 2018).
Burnout Models
Early research attempts at conceptual models for burnout explored topics such as job
stress, job-person fit, conservation of resources, and imbalance. Job-stress models such as
Karasek’s (1979) emphasized the influence of job demands, or stressors, on employee
performance and well-being. Kahn and Byosiere (1992) focused on job-person fit as a diagnostic
of stress. Hobfoll and Freedy’s (1993) conservation of resources theory prioritized the lack or
dwindling of resources as the main antecedent of burnout. Siegrist (1996) framed burnout around
an imbalance of effort and rewards. These early conceptualizations began inquiry into the
interconnections between organizational and individual factors of burnout and were instrumental
in shaping the two dominant models that emerged to investigate organizational influences on
burnout and engagement: the AW model and the JD-R model (Leiter & Maslach, 2003;
Demerouti et al., 2001). A review of these conceptual models offers a primer on the leading
scholarship on burnout and applied mitigation interventions.

35

Areas of Worklife Model
Building on their research on the dimensions of burnout and engagement, Leiter and
Maslach (2003) developed the AW model as a comprehensive framework to assess the impacts
of organizational variables on burnout. Their approach combined the job stressors, imbalance
and job-person fit by proffering that burnout is catalyzed by job stressors fostering job-person
imbalances in a few key areas of worklife. In the AW model, burnout is caused by chronic
mismatches between employees and six areas of worklife previously outlined in their research:
workload, control, rewards, community, fairness, and values (Leiter & Maslach, 2003).
Mitigating burnout in the AW model involves a continuous effort by employees and
organizations to maintain congruence in these six areas (Leiter & Maslach, 1999). In this
interaction model, prolonged mismatches in any, some, or all of the areas of worklife, are
antecedents for burnout; conversely, the greater the match, the higher the engagement (Leiter &
Maslach, 2003). A brief overview of each organizational area will elucidate their significance.
The first two areas of the model, workload and control, are influenced by Karasek and
Theorell’s (1990) demand-control theory. The AW model’s first area of worklife: workload,
refers to excessive job demands. Inordinate amounts of work requiring physical and cognitive
output under unreasonable time pressures are likely to produce exhaustion, a key dimension of
burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 1999). Further, exhaustion is a mediator of the relationship between
workload and the other two dimensions of burnout in the MBI: cynicism and professional
efficacy (Lee & Ashforth, 1996). Chronic work exhaustion without opportunities to recover
negatively affects work quality, professional relationships, and the ability to explore new skills
and opportunities (Maslach et al., 2001). The second area of the AW model, control, captures
workers’ perceived ability to impact the stakeholders and decisions, determining their nature and
36

scope of work, and the appropriate access to developmental resources to perform their
responsibilities (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). Alarcon’s (2011) meta-analysis of job demands
leading to burnout affirms that the incapacity of workers to align their desires and values with
their work, along with the experience of role conflict and role ambiguity, heightens exhaustion
and cynicism and decreases efficacy.
The third area of the AW model, reward, deals with employees’ monetary, social, and
intrinsic expectations (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). Lack of recognition from peers, managers, and
customers creates feelings of inefficacy (Maslach et al., 1996). Further, alienation from the
financial and social reward mechanisms surfaces sentiments of misalignment with the
organization’s values (Day & Randell, 2014). The fourth area of the AW model, community,
considers team interaction and integration, trust, and colleague cohesion (Maslach & Leiter,
2016). The experience of community through factors such as social support, conflict resolution,
and good-spirited collegiality cultivates engagement while reducing feelings of cynicism and
exhaustion (Boamah & Laschinger, 2016; Deery et al., 2011).
Fairness, the fifth area of the AW model, captures perceptions of equity, respect, and
favoritism (Leiter & Maslach, 2017). In a related study of 135 medical interns, Jin et al. (2015)
affirmed the negative statistical relationship between burnout and organizational injustice, as
organizational injustice had particularly strong correlations with exhaustion and cynicism.
Lastly, the sixth area of the AW model, values, encompasses the ideals and motivations that
originally attracted employees to their jobs (Maslach & Leiter, 2008b; Hendel & Kagan, 2014).
In a study with two German samples totaling approximately 2,000 workers, values and workload
were found to be the most critical areas of worklife (Brom et al., 2015). This study illustrated
that when employees perceived their organizations did not share their values, they were inclined
37

to become cynical and detached. Each of the six areas of the AW model has a moderating effect
on burnout; however, they do not impact organizations independently.
The AW Scale was introduced to evaluate the integrated impact of person-to-organization
incongruence in the six areas of worklife (Leiter & Maslach, 1999). In addition to influencing
each dimension of burnout, the situational factors within each area also impact the other areas.
For example, perceived unfairness can be related to a decreased sense of community, which, in
turn, generates a greater sense of values misalignment. The findings of the AWS proposed that
the workload and control domains played critical roles, but their impact was not statistically
significant enough to predict burnout. Further, incorporating reward, community, and fairness
strengthened the values domain predictions, which was found to be the most critical predictor of
all three dimensions of burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). In a random sample of 8,100 Canadian
physicians, Leiter et al. (2009) confirmed both workload and values congruence predicted
exhaustion and cynicism; however, values congruence was the only variable that predicted all
three dimensions of burnout. The factor confirmation and convergent validity of the AWS have
been affirmed in several studies leveraging the AW model to assess and predict burnout (Brom et
al., 2015; Gascón et al., 2013; Gregory & Menser, 2015; Masluk et al., 2018). Figure 1 illustrates
the interrelationships within the AWS scale and MBI.

38

Figure 1
Areas of Worklife Scale and Maslach Burnout Inventory

Note. Adapted from Areas of Worklife: A Structured Approach to Organizational Predictors of
Job Burnout by M. P. Leiter and C. Maslach, 2003, in P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.),
Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies (pp. 91–134).
Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

The AW model’s six areas of job-person mismatch illuminate the role of organizational
conditions as correlates of burnout. Mitigating burnout and enhancing engagement in this
conceptual framework involves continuously evaluating the job-person fit through the AWS and
striving for alignment (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). Globally, organizations regularly leverage the
MBI and AWS instruments to perform organizational checkups and implement strategic
workforce alignment initiatives (Maslach et al., 2012). However, the AW model is not the only
39

conceptual framework in mainstream circulation. The JD-R is a widely researched and applied
alternative conceptual model for assessing and addressing burnout.
Job Demands-Resources Model
The JD-R model conceptualized burnout as an imbalance between job demands and job
resources (Demerouti et al., 2001). Since it emerged in an English academic publication in 2001,
it has spawned hundreds of empirical studies and applied in thousands of global organizations
(Bakker et al., 2014). As with the AW model, the JD-R model was influenced by previous
conceptualizations of the interplay between organizational and personal correlates of burnout.
Previous burnout framing involving job stressors, effort-reward imbalance, and conservation of
resources were springboards for the JD-R model (Hobfoll et al., 2003; Karasek & Theorell,
1990; Siegrist, 1996). The model’s developers were particularly interested in the relationship
between job demands and job resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). They found previous
models, including the AW model, lacking in scope, real-world application, and void of attention
to positive correlates to engagement and employee well-being (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The
JD-R model was developed to provide a more holistic, cross-occupational framework for
employee well-being and performance; in its most recent iteration, shown in Figure 2, the model
has evolved into eight propositions (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017).

40

Figure 2
Job Demands-Resources Model

Note. Adapted from “Job Demands-Resources Theory: Taking Stock and Looking Forward” by
A. B. Bakker and E. Demerouti, 2017, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. (https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056)

Proposition 1: All Types of Job Characteristics Can Be Classified in One of Two
Categories: Job Demands and Job Resources. Demerouti et al. (2001) defined job demands as
the physical, psychological, social, or organizational components of work that necessitate
ongoing physical and/or psychological (cognitive and emotional) effort; maintenance of this
effort implies particular physiological and/or psychological costs. Examples of job demands
41

include quantitative demands (workload, time pressure), qualitative demands (emotional
demands, role conflict, role ambiguity, unfavorable physical work environment), and work-home
conflict (Bakker et al., 2014; Crawford et al., 2010; Jamal et al., 2021). Job resources refer to
those physical, psychological, social, or organizational components of work that are (a)
functional in achieving work goals, (b) reduce job demands and the associated physiological and
psychological costs, or (c) stimulate personal growth, learning, and development (Demerouti et
al., 2001). Examples of job resources include resources inherent in (a) the organization at large,
such as career opportunities, learning and development, and job security; (b) interpersonal and
social relationships, such as social support, supervisor and coworker support, team climate; (c)
the organization of work in terms of role clarity, participation in decision making; and (d) the
level of the task, meaning skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, performance
feedback (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
Proposition 2: Job Demands and Resources Catalyze Dual yet Distinct Processes: A
Health-Impairment Process and a Motivational Process. Job demands instigate a process of
burnout, whereas job resources motivate a process of engagement. In the former process, health
is impaired as chronic job demands diminish workers’ physical, cognitive, and emotional
resources, leading to exhaustion and health issues (Bakker et al., 2014). The motivational process
describes job resources supporting employees’ needs and well-being while cultivating
engagement and organizational commitment (Schaufeli et al., 2009). Several empirical studies
confirmed the validity of the dual processes (Alarcon, 2011; García‐Sierra et al., 2016; Llorens et
al., 2006; Lu et al., 2017). In one meta-analysis of the impact of job demands, consisting of
between 37 to 86 sample sets from multiple occupations, Alarcon (2011) confirmed that
demands such as workload and role ambiguity are indeed predictors of the exhaustion and
42

cynicism dimensions of burnout. Consistent with the findings of other cross-sectional and
longitudinal studies, Schaufeli et al. (2009) also validated the positive association between job
resources such as social support, autonomy, and performance feedback with engagement in a
longitudinal study of 201 managers and executives at a Dutch telecommunications company.
Proposition 3: Job Resources Can Buffer the Impact of Job Demands on Strain. Job
resources qualify the relationship between job demands and burnout. In their study of employees
in a large higher education institution, Bakker et al. (2005) found that the core dimensions of
burnout, exhaustion and cynicism were predicated on a combination of high demands and low
job resources. Specifically, they found that if workers experienced job resources such as social
support, feedback, and autonomy, job demands in the form of work overload, emotional
demands, and work-home conflict did not lead to high levels of burnout. Job resources buffered
the impact of job demands on burnout. In another study involving 148 Dutch organizations and
12,359 employees, Bakker et al. (2010) found an 88% correlation between job demands and job
resources with job resources such as colleague and leader support, learning opportunities, and
performance feedback predicting task enjoyment and organizational commitment in a context of
high job demands. In another study of 747 home care providers, researchers found a statistically
significant two-way relationship between job demands and job resources, highlighting that in
industries where job demands are not subject to high degrees of reform, burnout can be buffered
through addressing job resources (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Dollard, et al., 2007).
Proposition 4: Job Resources Particularly Influence Motivation When Job Demands
Are High. High job demands with high job resources are the optimal combination. In a study of
805 teachers, Bakker et al. (2007) performed moderated structural equation modeling analyses
and found approximately 80% two-way interaction effects verifying that specific job resources
43

helped teachers successfully deal with job demands. Another study involving 1,919 dentists also
found that job resources helped dentists deal with the high demands intrinsic to the dental
industry; the job resources also facilitated greater engagement (Hakanen et al., 2005). These
studies further validate a hypothesis of Hobfoll et al.’s (2018) conservation of resources theory in
that the greatest benefits of job resources for cultivating engagement are materialized in contexts
of high job demands. In this framing, high demands are viewed as a potential source of
motivation fostering engagement; however, high demands can also be a source of strain and lead
to burnout. Researchers have explored this distinction and delineated between hindrance
demands and challenge demands (Bakker & Sanz-Vergel, 2013). Hindrance demands refer to job
demands such as role conflicts that inhibit employee success, while challenge demands refer to
job demands such as optimal workload that require effort but cultivate employee growth
(Podsakoff et al., 2007; Tadić et al., 2015).
Proposition 5: Personal Resources Such As Optimism and Self-Efficacy Can Play a
Similar Role As Job Resources. Personal resources refer to individual factors related to
personality traits, outlook orientations, and other character aspects that reflect resiliency (Hobfoll
et al., 2003). In a qualitative literature review exploring the impact of personality traits on work
engagement, Mäkikangas et al. (2013) found that emotional stability, extraversion, and
conscientiousness had consistent relationships with higher work engagement. Xanthopoulou,
Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2007) tested the relationship between personal resources
(self-efficacy, self-esteem, optimism), engagement, and exhaustion among 714 workers and
showed that personal resources were indeed a mediator with engagement and exhaustion; further,
personal resources also impacted how the respondents felt about their job resources. A meta-
analysis of work engagement also highlighted the correlation between self-efficacy, optimism,
44

and high levels of engagement (Halbesleben, 2010). As with job resources, personal resources
can buffer the impact of job demands: mitigating burnout and enhancing engagement.
Proposition 6: Motivation Has a Positive Impact on Job Performance, Whereas Job
Strain Has a Negative Impact on Job Performance. The divergent effects of motivation and
strain are a significant distinction in the JD-R model. The positive impact of motivation on job
performance includes task focus, energy, and goal orientation; conversely, the negative impact of
job strain includes insufficient energy levels to achieve work objectives (Bakker & Demerouti,
2017). Xanthopoulou et al. (2009) structured a study to explore the relationship between
financial results and work engagement within the restaurant industry and observed that on days
when job resources and engagement were high, there were also greater financial results.
Examining the relationships between job demands, job resources, burnout, and objective
performance, Bakker, Van Emmerik, and Van Riet (2008) performed a multivariate analysis of
variance on responses from 176 temporary workers and discovered cynicism to be a mediator
between job resources and performance, definitively illustrating the negative impact of a burnout
dimension on job performance. Motivated workers who are engaged and committed are more
likely to perform well, while strained workers who are exhausted and/or impaired with health
concerns are more likely to underperform.
Proposition 7: Employees Who Are Motivated by Their Work Are Likely to Use
Job-Crafting Behaviors, Which Lead to Higher Levels of Job and Personal Resources and
Even Higher Levels of Motivation. Job crafting refers to altering cognitive, task, and/or
relational parameters to framework activities and relationships, thereby changing role orientation
and internalization (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). In a longitudinal three-wave study engaging
a sample of 288 people, Tims et al. (2015) showed that job crafting and work engagement were
45

related, with the implication that opportunities to engage in job crafting would increase
employees’ engagement. Vogt et al. (2016), in another three-wave longitudinal study on the
consequences of job crafting, also showed that employee health and well-being are improved by
building resourceful and challenging work contexts through job crafting. Workplace
interventions providing job crafting opportunities have, indeed, led to employees reporting
greater engagement and overall well-being (Van den Heuvel et al., 2015; Van Wingerden et al.,
2017). Job crafting also has the potential to enhance existing job and personal resources,
inspiring greater motivation, which then leads back to further amplifying job and personal
resources; Bakker and Demerouti (2017) defined this virtuous cycle of causal and reciprocal
effects as a gain spiral.
Proposition 8: Employees Who Are Strained by Their Work Are Likely to Show
Self-Undermining Behaviors, Which Lead to Higher Levels of Job Demands and Even
Higher Levels of Job Strain. Similar to the positive causal and reciprocal effects of job crafting,
self-undermining behaviors can result in a vicious cycle of increased strain and job demands.
Bakker and Costa (2014) refer to self-undermining behaviors as behaviors that create additional
challenges and interfere with performance. These self-undermining behaviors often generate
undesired job demands and enhance strain. In their study on the loss spiral of job demands,
Demerouti et al. (2004) showed evidence for reciprocal relationships between exhaustion, work-
home interference, and work pressure. In another study in the financial sector consisting of 352
employees, baseline burnout predicted future burnout as existing burnout amplified the perceived
job demands, such as workload, and reduced the perceived job resources, such as social support
(ten Brummelhuis et al., 2011). Abating the loss spiral is critical to an effective burnout
mitigation strategy (Bakker & Wang, 2020).
46

Conclusion
As members of the global workforce increasingly experienced work-related exhaustion
and cynicism, burnout became a cultural keyword. The WHO’s burnout syndrome inclusion in
the 2019 ICD-11 was a significant event in furthering burnout awareness and highlighted the
novelty of research on the phenomenon. Tracing the recent history of burnout research,
foundational elements of burnout, including definitions, the relationship between burnout and
engagement, and dominant burnout models, were reviewed. Combining the respective research
on virtual work and burnout will provide worthwhile insights into the burnout experience of
virtual workers.
Virtual Employee Burnout
Virtual employee burnout refers to virtual workers’ experience of burnout syndrome. The
study of both burnout and virtual work are relatively new fields of research; both emerged in the
literature in the last quarter of the 20th century (Freudenberger, 1974; Nilles, 1975). The study of
the interplay between the two constructs is very novel. This study aimed to add to the emerging
literature on their relationship. Virtual employee burnout has entered the public discourse in
association with the proliferation of remote work caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Periodicals and digital media outlets such as Forbes and Harvard Business Review have recently
published articles on strategies for remote workers to mitigate burnout (Stahl, 2020; Breslau &
Ramseur, 2021). Corporate research firms like Gallup and Gartner have also published reports on
burnout among virtual workers. In Gallup’s (2020) report on employee burnout, more remote
workers reported feeling burnout than in-office workers, with 29% of fully remote workers
expressing a sense of burnout, an 11% increase from the prior year. In an article published by
Gartner, Venkataramani (2021) stated that 93% of HR leaders are concerned about remote work
47

fatigue caused by longer hours and increased challenges to concentration. Virtual employee
burnout is a growing and complex problem with grand implications for the economy and society;
addressing it requires understanding it from a theoretical perspective.
The literature does not contain a theoretical framework for virtual employee burnout.
Researchers have leveraged burnout models to investigate the relationship between components
of virtuality on employee burnout, engagement, and well-being, but there is not an existing
conceptual model for this topic on the whole (Collins et al., 2016; Sardeshmukh et al., 2012).
This section will combine the literature reviews on virtual work and burnout to develop a
conceptual model for this topic. The JD-R model was used to frame virtual employee burnout in
this study. The JD-R model was selected over the AW model because it is more comprehensive,
flexible, and validated than the AW model (Bakker et al., 2014; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). The
job demands and job resources categories capture the AW model’s six areas of worklife and
extend beyond the six areas. The JD-R model also separates the constructs of burnout and
engagement and allows for consideration of the moderators of each versus approaching burnout
and engagement as bipolar ends of the same continuum (Bakker et al., 2004). This study offers a
theoretical conceptualization of virtual employee burnout that will explore the impacts of the
benefits and challenges of virtual work on the job demands and resources categories and
incorporates the benefits and challenges of virtual work into the eight JD-R propositions.
Impacts of Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges on Job Demands and Resources
As illustrated in Figure 3, the proposed conceptualization of the impacts of virtual work’s
benefits and challenges on job demands and job resources, inferred from the literature review on
virtual work and burnout, posits that virtual work’s benefits positively affect job demands and
resources while its challenges harm these.
48

Figure 3
Impacts of Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges on Job Demands and Resources

Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges Incorporated Into JD-R Model’s Propositions
Integrating the benefits and challenges of virtual work into the JD-R model frames the
impacts of virtual work on burnout and engagement in a systematic conceptualization. The
49

effects of virtual work’s benefits and challenges will be considered through the JD-R model’s
eight conceptualizations.
Proposition 1: All Types of Job Characteristics Can Be Classified in One of Two Categories:
Job Demands and Job Resources
Job demands require physical or psychological effort at the cost of employee energy,
while job resources are functional, reduce the cost of job demands, and stimulate professional
growth (Demerouti et al., 2001). In this conceptualization of virtual employee burnout, failure to
enhance the benefits and mitigate the challenges of virtual work will increase hindrance demands
and decrease the value of job resources. Conversely, enhancing the benefits of virtual work and
mitigating its challenges will optimize both.
Propositions 2, 3, 4, and 6
The second proposition is that job demands and resources catalyze dual yet distinct
processes: a health-impairment process and a motivational process. The third is that job
resources can buffer the impact of job demands on strain. The fourth is that job resources
particularly influence motivation when job demands are high, and the sixth is that motivation has
a positive impact on job performance, whereas job strain has a negative impact on job
performance. These four JD-R propositions are grouped together because they encompass the
enablers of motivation and strain, the relationship between the enablers, and their impact on
performance. As illustrated in Figure 3, the benefits and challenges of virtual work impact job
demands and resources. Following the premise of Proposition 2, when virtual work’s benefits are
minimized and challenges unmitigated, hindrance job demands are magnified and job resources
underleveraged, initiating the negative energetic process leading to chronic strain. Conversely,
50

when virtual work’s benefits are amplified and its challenges mitigated, job demands are
optimized and job resources are enhanced, leading to motivation.
Figure 4 illustrates the incorporation of virtual work benefits and challenges into the JD-
R model. In line with Proposition 3, amplifying virtual work benefits and mitigating the
challenges will enhance job resources, thereby buffering the impact of job demands on strain.
Adhering to Proposition 4, enhancing job resources will influence the motivation for high job
demands. Job demands are not inherently negative; they represent the effort needed to do the job.
Strain ensues when the demands are a hindrance to work versus a facilitator (Bakker & Sanz-
Vergel, 2013; LePine et al., 2005). Unmanaged, minimized benefits and unmitigated challenges
can compromise job resources, undermine motivation, and cultivate hindrance job demands that
catalyze strain. Highlighting Proposition 6, strain lowers job performance, and motivation
increases it. Incorporating the benefits and challenges of virtual work into the JD-R model
illustrates how managing these benefits and challenges can have a systematic impact on
performance.

51

Figure 4
Virtual Work Benefits and Challenges Incorporation into JD-R Model

Proposition 5: Personal Resources Such As Optimism and Self-Efficacy Can Play a Similar
Role As Job Resources
If personal resources such as optimism and self-efficacy toward one’s job can have a
positive reciprocal effect on job resources, then optimism and self-efficacy toward being a virtual
worker should have a positive reciprocal impact on job resources in a virtual context (Chan et al.,
2017; Mäkikangas et al., 2013). Conversely, low self-efficacy and negativity related to virtual
work arrangements will have a negative reciprocal effect on job resources (Grant et al., 2013).
52

Collective efficacy for collaborating and performing well as a virtual team is also a moderator
for virtual team effectiveness (Cordery & Soo, 2008).
Propositions 7 and 8
The seventh proposition is that employees who are motivated by their work are likely to
use job crafting behaviors, which lead to higher levels of job and personal resources and even
higher levels of motivation. The eighth is that employees who are strained by their work are
likely to show self-undermining behaviors, which lead to higher levels of job demands, and even
higher levels of job strain. The gain and loss cycle propositions further elucidate virtual work’s
benefits and challenges. Job crafting, cited in Proposition 7, is especially relevant and significant
for virtual workers trying to maintain equipoise within the work-home interface (Bakker &
Albrecht, 2018; Scharp et al., 2021). Given the home-life demands while working from home, it
is likely that the ability to engage in some degree of job crafting on a daily basis will result in
more positive outcomes for virtual employees (Gordon et al., 2018; Petrou et al., 2012). The gain
cycle ensues as the more motivated virtual employees are in their virtual contexts, they will
experience greater levels of personal and job resources, which leads to greater motivation, and
the virtuous gain cycle continues. Undermining behaviors, referenced in Proposition 8, is a real
existential threat for virtual workers. Factors such as physical isolation and work-home
distractions present opportunities for virtual workers to engage in behaviors that cultivate
additional challenges and interferences with their performance (Bakker & Costa, 2014; Bakker &
Wang, 2020; Palumbo et al., 2020).
Conclusion
Virtual employee burnout became a relevant topic in public discourse due to the scope
and scale of workers thrust into virtual work arrangements because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
53

While desiring to retain the perceived benefits of virtual work, millions of workers are dealing
with the challenges of virtual work and experiencing symptoms of burnout syndrome. The
literature on virtual work and burnout, respectively, is fairly recent. Literature on this topic is
nascent. This study combined the literature on virtual work and burnout and developed a
conceptual model of virtual employee burnout. Leveraging the JD-R model of burnout and
engagement, the benefits and challenges of virtual work were incorporated into the JD-R model’s
propositions, resulting in a conceptual framework for understanding and explaining the problem
of practice. This framework is also valuable for managing virtual employee burnout.
Management Best Practices for Mitigating Virtual Employee Burnout
The nascence of literature on virtual employee burnout equates to a dearth of literature on
management best practices for managing virtual employee burnout. As with the literature review
on virtual employee burnout, the review of management best practices for virtual employee
burnout will combine the literature on management best practices for virtual employees and
management best practices for burnout.
Management Best Practices for Managing Virtual Employees
Since ICT applications enabled virtual work, managers have realized that managing
virtual workers requires an expanded management toolkit. In-office management practices
involving visual accountability and management by walking around are obsolete when
employees are remote; additionally, managers no longer have the benefit of taking cues from
body language or spontaneous interactions (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Golden, 2006; Nilles,
1994). This review of management best practices for virtual workers leverages the literature
review on virtual work by framing management best practices for virtual employees as the
practices through which managers optimize virtual work’s benefits and mitigate its challenges
54

(see Figure 3 for benefits and challenges). The literature on virtual employee management best
practices revealed virtual managers: (a) enhance manager-employee communications, (b)
facilitate virtual team cohesion, (c) cultivate an organizational culture that supports work-home
integration, (d) ensure clear organizational and work alignment, (e) train virtual employees on
virtual work best practices, (f) incorporate virtual work proficiencies into formal and informal
performance management conversations.
Successful virtual managers appreciate that they must enhance their communication with
and between their virtual employees due to the lack of in-person formal and informal
interactions. In addition to occasional face-to-face meetings (where and when feasible), effective
virtual managers also consistently leverage and enable available ICT applications, including
email, videoconferencing, and other inter-organizational communication applications, to sustain
relationships with and between team members (Golden et al., 2008; Hill & Bartol, 2018; Liao,
2017; Marlow et al., 2017). In a study of 317 dispersed software development teams, Garro-
Abarca et al. (2021) found that the greatest determinant of virtual team performance was
communication, followed by trust related to leadership and team cohesion. These findings were
consistent with other studies affirming the significance and role of communication in facilitating
trust, psychological safety, engagement, organizational commitment, and team cohesion (Breuer
et al., 2020; Charlier et al., 2016; Hacker et al., 2019; Horwitz et al., 2006; Lippert & Dulewicz,
2018). Further, strong communication between managers and teams decreases feelings of social
isolation and provides needed social support (Bentley et al., 2016; Dery & Hafermalz, 2016;
Smith et al., 2018). Cohesive and supportive relationships between management and colleagues
in virtual contexts are further amplified when employees perceive manager appreciation for the
challenges of the work-home interface.
55

Effective virtual managers cultivate a culture that is supportive of work-home integration.
They understand the work-home interface is hard to compartmentalize due to permeable
boundaries and foster an environment that allows home and work life to coalesce. In a meta-
analysis involving 115 samples from 85 studies comprising 72,507 employees, Kossek et al.
(2011) found work-family-specific constructs of supervisor support and organizational support
reduced work-family conflict more than general supervisor and organizational support
constructs. In another study leveraging the European Sustainable Workforce Survey conducted in
259 organizations with 11,011 employees in nine countries, researchers confirmed that a family-
supportive work culture that extended employees the empathy and flexibility needed to tend to
family and personal matters lowered employees’ sense of work-home conflict (Van der Lippe &
Lippényi, 2020). Great virtual managers also consider that different demographics (e.g., women,
mothers, fathers, seniors, disabled, etc.) have different experiences attempting to manage the
work-home interface and need to be managed with nuance to facilitate equity and inclusion
(Lyttelton et al., 2022; Troup & Rose, 2012). Organizational and social support buffer the
challenges of effective virtual work; however, effective virtual managers also equip virtual
workers to do their work well.
Strong virtual managers ensure organizational and work alignment and train their teams
on virtual work best practices. In a study assessing the relationship between organizational
alignment and virtual team outcomes, Zafari et al. (2019) showed that perceived organizational
alignment moderated the positive effect of autonomy on work-related outcomes in the context of
flexible work. Managers who provided this strategic alignment to their teams gave workers
clarity on their role and tasks’ contribution to team and organizational objectives; these
56

employees, in turn, displayed higher levels of work engagement and organizational
identification.
Effective virtual managers also recognize virtual workers benefit from direct training on
virtual work best practices. A key best practice is optimizing ICT applications while avoiding the
dangers of technology-related stress due to over-collaboration with colleagues and overwork due
to 24/7 ICT accessibility (Butts et al., 2015; Chesley, 2014; Cross, 2021; Ellwart et al., 2015;
Fuller et al., 2016; Laitinen & Valo, 2018). Another key training theme involves best practices
for reducing work-home conflict (Basile & Beauregard, 2016; Felstead & Henseke, 2017; Major
& Litano, 2016; Palumbo et al., 2020; Thulin et al., 2019). Respected managers also train their
employees on taking the time to recover and recoup through varied means, including meditation,
microbreaks, nature walks, exercise, and working in different geographical locations; some
managers even advise their employees on optimal home-office design (Binnewies & Sonnentag,
2008; Fonner & Stache, 2012; Kim et al., 2018; Ng, 2010; Richardson & McKenna, 2014;
Steidle et al., 2017). Managers and team members can encourage and hold each other
accountable for these best practices.
Incorporating virtual work habits into performance management conversations is a best
practice that fosters virtual employee accountability and growth. Behaviors, practices, and habits
related to optimizing virtuality and mitigating its challenges should be a part of the performance
evaluation process for virtual workers (Makarius & Larson, 2017; Malhotra et al., 2007). In a
study using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling on data from 1,578
employees, Albrecht et al. (2018) showed that organizational resources such as perceived human
resource practices, senior leadership, and strategic alignment were positively related to an
organizational engagement climate. Effective virtual leaders understand their critical role in their
57

employees’ engagement, organizational alignment, and performance; they, therefore,
consistently engage in formal and informal conversations to facilitate leader-member exchange
and deepen trust and organizational commitment (Alfes et al., 2013; Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014;
Ford et al., 2017; Gutermann et al., 2017). Adept virtual managers leverage performance
management conversations to check in on employee well-being, answer questions, offer specific
performance feedback, and provide guidance on career development (Albrecht et al., 2015; Hill
& Bartol, 2016; Montano et al., 2017; Peters et al., 2014). These conversations give clear
direction and assurance and mitigate virtual employees’ anxieties related to performance and
career progression. These six best practices for managing virtual employees amplify virtual work
benefits and mitigate virtual work challenges. Next, management best practices for managing
burnout will be discussed.
Management Best Practices for Mitigating Burnout
Burnout syndrome is a concern for managers because it undermines employee
performance and well-being. Organizations that acknowledge burnout as a human capital threat
may provide resources and offerings, including employee assistance programs with access to
mental health therapists, in-house well-being programs, paid time off for mental health days,
classes or webinars on work-life balance, mental health and well-being, and subsidized
subscriptions to meditation and mindfulness applications (Chen et al., 2021; Ioannou et al., 2022;
Zheng et al., 2015). While these programs and offerings may provide value, they are
supplemental resources and do not address the structural and systemic causes of burnout within
the job itself. The management best practices for mitigating burnout in this study are informed by
the literature on burnout and burnout models. In the AW model, burnout is mitigated through
increased congruence between employees and the six areas of worklife: control, workload,
58

rewards, community, fairness, and values (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). In the JD-R model, burnout
is mitigated by optimizing job demands and enhancing job resources (Bakker & Demerouti,
2017). This review focuses on management best practices framed by the JD-R model.
In the JD-R model, managers mitigate strain by optimizing job demands and cultivate
engagement by enhancing job resources. Although the JD-R model delineates the constructs of
burnout and engagement, engagement is negatively correlated with burnout; increased
engagement implies mitigated burnout (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010). Managers can mitigate strain
by curtailing hindrance demands such as impossible workloads with implausible time pressures,
reducing role conflicts and role ambiguity, and eliminating hindrance emotional demands,
including unnecessary distress related to job performance and career progression (Crawford et
al., 2010; Zapf et al., 2013). Optimizing job demands involves designing employees’ work to
challenge them to be their best and give them a clear line of sight into how their efforts drive
team and organizational objectives (Harvey et al., 2014; Sánchez et al., 2007). Managers can also
optimize job demands by fostering an environment that sympathizes with employee attempts to
sustain work-home balance (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014). By coaching staff to detect and avoid
unintentional self-undermining behaviors such as conflict creation, poor communication, and
poor time management, managers can further help employees reduce strain by keeping
employees off the JD-R loss cycle (Bakker & Wang, 2020). Management intervention to
minimize hindrance demands and optimize positively challenging demands will reduce employee
strain and mitigate burnout.
To drive engagement, managers can enhance job resources illustrated in Figure 3. By
making these resources available and accessible to employees, managers help them fulfill their
job demands and grow professionally. Managers may not be able to focus on all resources at one
59

time, but they can prioritize job resources based on greatest needs or areas of greatest potential
impact. In a study involving 12,359 employees across 148 organizations, Bakker et al. (2010) found
high positive correlations between job resources, such as performance feedback and colleague/leader
support, and dependent variables, such as task engagement and organizational commitment
(especially in environments with high job demands). Several other studies attest to the buffering
effect of job resources (Bakker et al., 2007; Tuckey et al., 2012; Schaufeli et al., 2014). An additive
practice managers can also engage in is coaching employees on their personal resources, such as self-
efficacy and optimism; this will have a positive reciprocal impact on already existing job resources.
Through working with employees to craft and design their roles and responsibilities, managers can
further help employees to increase motivation by keeping them on the JD-R gain cycle. Management
intervention to enhance job resources will increase motivation and, in effect, increase engagement; as
engagement increases, burnout is mitigated. Integrating best practices for managing burnout with
best practices for managing virtual employees provides a conceptual framework for managing virtual
employee burnout.
Management Best Practices for Mitigating Virtual Employee Burnout
Combining the literature reviews on best practices for managing virtual employees and
burnout, this study’s framework conceptualizes management as a moderator for virtual work
benefits and challenges and an influence on virtual work’s impacts on job demands and job
resources. As seen in Figure 5, management practices that minimize virtual benefits and fail to
mitigate virtual work challenges will magnify hindrance job demands and under-leverage job
resources, thereby increasing strain and decreasing motivation, leading to burnout and
compromised job performance. Conversely, amplifying virtual work benefits and mitigating
virtual work challenges will optimize job demands and enhance job resources, thereby increasing
motivation and decreasing strain, leading to greater engagement and improved job performance.
60

Figure 5
Management Impacts on Virtual Employee Strain, Motivation, and Performance

In addition to management best practices that amplify virtual work benefits and mitigate
virtual work challenges, managers can also impact strain and motivation through management
practices to optimize job demands and enhance job resources directly (see Figure 3), including
engaging employees in job crafting, and coaching them through self-undermining behaviors.
This conceptualization for managing virtual employee burnout offers managers a framework to
concurrently manage virtual work, burnout, and their interrelationships.
Literature Review Conclusion
This literature review assessed the key topics of this study. Before addressing
management preconditions for mitigating virtual employee burnout, it was imperative to perform
a review of the literature on virtual work, burnout, and management best practices for managing
61

virtual employees and burnout, respectively. A conceptual framework for this study was
developed by combining the literature on virtual work and burnout. Additionally, a conceptual
framework was developed for managing virtual employee burnout by combining the literature on
management best practices for managing virtual employees and management best practices for
managing burnout. The subsequent section will elucidate Clark and Estes’s (2008) conceptual
framework for analyzing and closing organizational performance gaps.
Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical framework for
identifying, assessing, and closing organizational performance gaps (Figure 6). These gaps are
established through observable and measurable shortfalls between performance goals and actual
performance and are diagnosed through knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
influences (Clark & Estes, 2008). The knowledge dimension leverages Anderson and
Krathwohl’s (2001) four types of knowledge from their revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. The motivation dimension focuses on the
key stakeholders’ choice, persistence, and mental effort through consideration of their self-
efficacy, expectancy-value, attributions, and emotions (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011; Schunk et al.,
2014). The organizational dimension assesses the cultural settings and models influencing the
stakeholder (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schein & Schein, 2017). In exploring and
addressing a performance shortfall, the gap analysis investigates a performance gap’s assumed
KMO influences, with a focus on the stakeholders deemed most able to address it. The gap’s
causes, needs, and assets are then derived through validation or invalidation of the assumed
influences (Rueda, 2011). Gap closure is achieved through the integrated implementation and
evaluation of recommended solutions informed by the analysis.
62

Figure 6
Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Framework

Clark and Estes’s’ (2008) gap analysis was adapted to an innovation model and
implemented as the conceptual framework for this study involving new organizational and
stakeholder goals related to mitigating virtual employee burnout at ACPO. The stakeholders of
focus are ACPO managers, and thus, the innovation model was leveraged to identify and
examine their KMO needs to reach their performance goal. Management preconditions include
being educated, supported, and resourced to address this issue with team members and with the
organization as a structural whole. For the remainder of Chapter Two, the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that impact the managers’ capacity will be generated
based on general theory, context-specific literature, and an existing understanding of the
organization. Subsequent to this chapter, Chapter Three will outline the mixed-methods research
design for analyzing the assumed influences, Chapter Four will discuss the study’s findings on
root needs and assets, and Chapter Five will detail an integrated implementation and evaluation
plan for ACPO managers to achieve their performance goal.
63

Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
This literature review on stakeholder KMO influences focuses on the factors impacting
ACPO managers’ goal to meet management preconditions that will facilitate mitigating virtual
employee burnout. This section examines assumed knowledge and skills, motivations, and
organizational influences related to achieving the managers’ goal.
Knowledge and Skills
For ACPO managers to achieve their goal, it is assumed that they will need certain
knowledge and skills. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) delineated the four types of knowledge as
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge refers to the most
concrete knowledge type, involving knowledge of specific details, elements, and terminology
(Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge is a progressive advance in the spectrum of concrete
to abstract knowledge and describes knowledge of categories, classifications, relationships,
theories, and models (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Rueda, 2011). A further progression toward
abstract knowledge, procedural knowledge refers to knowledge of subject-specific skills,
techniques, methods, and combinations thereof for application (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001;
Rueda, 2011). The most abstract of the knowledge types, metacognitive knowledge, describes
self and strategic knowledge, along with knowledge of inherent cognitive processes, contextual
conditions, and self-regulatory capabilities that frame said knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer,
2011). The assumed knowledge influences required for ACPO managers to meet management
preconditions for mitigating virtual employee burnout are conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge types.

64

Assumed Conceptual Knowledge Influence: ACPO Managers Need to Understand the
Relationships Between Virtual Work, Engagement, and Burnout
To mitigate virtual employee burnout, managers need to understand the relationships
between virtual work, engagement, and burnout. Understanding involves constructing meaning
from instructional messages, including written, oral, and graphic communication (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001). Understanding the relationship between virtual work, engagement, and
burnout first requires managers to demonstrate general knowledge about virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. Knowledge of both the benefits and challenges of virtual work
informs managers’ ability to amplify the benefits and mitigate the challenges (Allen et al., 2015;
Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). Regarding engagement, it is important for managers to have a
unified conceptualization of engagement involving a positive, fulfilling, work-related mindset
inclusive of vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002).
Conversely, it is critical for managers to know burnout components: exhaustion,
cynicism, and professional efficacy, and their contributors (Maslach & Leiter, 2016).
Recognizing the relationships between these three constructs includes knowing the negative
relationship between engagement and burnout and knowing that fostering motivation generates
engagement while cultivating strain generates burnout (Alarcon, 2011; Bakker & Albrecht,
2018). Knowing the causal relationships between job demands, job resources, engagement, and
burnout is also imperative for managers, as several studies demonstrate the positive effect of
optimized job demands and enhanced job resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Schaufeli et al.,
2014; Tadić et al., 2015). Knowing the constructs of virtual work and the intrinsic relationships
between engagement and burnout, managers can then understand that amplifying the benefits
65

and mitigating the challenges of virtual work optimizes job demands and enhances job resources,
thereby increasing engagement and mitigating burnout.
Assumed Procedural Knowledge Influence 1: ACPO Managers Need to Know How to Build
Trust With Virtual Team Members
Procedural knowledge involves knowing requisite skills, techniques, methods, and
criteria for performing a task (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). The literature review established
management best practices for mitigating virtual employee burnout as practices that amplify
virtual work benefits, mitigate virtual work challenges, optimize job demands, and enhance job
resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Crawford et al., 2010; Grant et al., 2013; Harvey et al.,
2014; Ioannou et al., 2022; Palumbo et al., 2020; Peters et al., 2014; Schaufeli et al., 2014).
Building trust with team members is an essential behavior that facilitates these management best
practices. Effective leadership approaches, including transformational and authentic leadership,
emphasize the importance of trust in successful managerial relationships (Azanza et al., 2015;
Caniëls et al., 2018; Gilbert et al., 2016). Trust is a critical component for effectively leading
virtual teams; however, building and sustaining trust is a magnified challenge in virtual contexts
(Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; Breuer et al., 2016; Lippert & Dulewicz, 2018; Morrison-Smith &
Ruiz, 2020). Cultivating trust requires vulnerability for managers and team members to openly
discuss the benefits and challenges of virtual work and relevant job demands and resources
without fear of negative impressions or disciplinary action (Gilson et al., 2015; Hacker et al.,
2019; Lu, 2015).
Managers need to know how to build trust with their team members. To investigate
neurological components of the relationship between management behaviors and feelings of
trust, Zak (2017) explored management behaviors that stimulate the release of the brain chemical
66

oxytocin. Oxytocin is responsible for feelings of empathy and care; the more oxytocin released
in the brain during interactions with a particular person, the more one is inclined to trust the
person. Zak’s (2017) neuroscience research identified eight management behaviors, using the
mnemonic OXYTOCIN, that stimulate oxytocin release and cultivate trust: (a) recognize
excellent performance (ovation), (b) design difficult but achievable challenges (eXpectations),
(c) give team members freedom to regulate how to do their work (yield), (d) enable job crafting
(transfer), (e) share information broadly (openness), (f) intentionally build relationships (caring),
(g) invest in whole-person growth, and (h) be vulnerable (natural). Using data from a nationally
representative sample in the United States, Zak also found that the OXYTOCIN factors were not
statistically independent in explaining variance in organizational trust; indeed, the sum of the
individual coefficients of the variants exceeded one. As such, Zak’s prescriptive to managers is
not to perform the behaviors in any particular sequence but to perform them concurrently. The
ACPO managers can build trust with virtual team members by performing these eight behaviors
simultaneously and consistently.
Assumed Procedural Knowledge Influence 2: ACPO Managers Need to Know How to Coach
Their Virtual Team Members to Excel in a Virtual Context
Management coaching refers to conversations managers have with team members to help
them improve performance and excel in their role. As stated in the previous procedural
knowledge need, managers’ best practices for mitigating virtual employee burnout involve
practices that amplify virtual work benefits, mitigate virtual work challenges, optimize job
demands, and enhance job resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Crawford et al., 2010; Grant et
al., 2013; Harvey et al., 2014; Ioannou et al., 2022; Palumbo et al., 2020; Peters et al., 2014;
Schaufeli et al., 2014). Managers’ regular coaching conversations with their direct reports on
67

these practices are essential (Bentley et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2018; Zafari et al., 2019).
Managers need to know how to coach their team members to excel in a virtual context.
In their seminal article on the fallacy of feedback, Buckingham and Goodall (2019)
explained that despite an infatuation with feedback in management science and practice,
feedback in which one person tells another what they are doing wrong and what they need to do
to improve is ineffective. The feedback fallacies included false notions that the feedback
provider is an accurate source of truth, the feedback recipient lacks required abilities, and great
performance is universal, describable, and transferable (Buckingham & Goodall, 2019).
Although most performance management systems are built around a performance gap approach
addressing shortcomings, neuroscientific and psychological studies have found that negative
criticism impairs judgment; additionally, positive attention is 30 times more effective than
negative attention in creating high performance (Boyatzis & McKee, 2011; Brim & Asplund,
2009). Accounting for these feedback fallacies and the power of focusing on employee strengths,
Buckingham and Goodall (2019) implore managers to engage in four behaviors as they coach
employees to excel: (a) acknowledge positive outcomes, (b) describe personal instinctive
reactions, (c) make positive outcome discussions their highest priority, and (d) explore present,
past, and future solutions about which employees already feel confident. The ACPO managers
can coach their team members to excel in a virtual context by applying these four behaviors to
their conversations about burnout mitigation best practices. These behaviors are to be performed
simultaneously and consistently, not in any particular sequence.

68

Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influence 1: ACPO Managers Need to Configure
Personal Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation Best Practices That Best Help Them to
Mitigate Their Own Virtual Employee Burnout
Metacognitive knowledge facilitates problem solving and informs people when and why
to take particular actions (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). As a metacognitive behavior, reflection
facilitates evaluation and progress based on a set of criteria (Krathwohl, 2002). Metacognitive
analysis on virtual employee burnout mitigation best practices will enable managers to explore
their pre-existing knowledge on the topic and examine what aspects of that knowledge best align
with their personal needs. Managers’ reflection on new knowledge they need to address personal
challenges with this issue is also a vital component of metacognitive analysis. Furthermore,
managers’ metacognitive analysis also involves assessing their knowledge needs to deconstruct
and configure the right best practices to help them mitigate their personal virtual employee
burnout most effectively. These reflections, conceptual arrangements, deconstructions, and
custom configurations inform managers’ coaching and give them credibility to manage their staff
in this area (Ford et al., 2017; Hill & Bartol, 2016; Panteli et al., 2019). Reflection on their
personal best practices will also help them be more empathetic to their direct reports’ challenges
and celebratory of their existing proficiencies (Gutermann et al., 2017; Liao, 2017; Montano et
al., 2017).
Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influence 2: ACPO Managers Need to Configure Best-
Practice Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation Organizational Strategies That Align With
Their Organization
In addition to reflecting on and configuring personal best practices, ACPO managers also
need to reflect on and configure best-practice organizational strategies that best fit their
69

organizational context. The same metacognitive analysis is necessary to problem-solve and
evaluate concepts, processes, and progress based on best-practice criteria and organizational
nuance (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Metacognitive analysis on organizational virtual
employee burnout mitigation best practices will enable managers to explore their pre-existing
knowledge on the topic and examine what aspects of that knowledge best fit their organization’s
needs. Managers’ reflection on new knowledge they need to address organizational challenges
with virtual employee burnout is also a vital component of metacognitive analysis.
Furthermore, managers’ metacognitive analysis also involves assessing their knowledge
needs to deconstruct and configure the right best practices to help their organization most
effectively. These reflections, conceptual arrangements, deconstructions, and custom
configurations inform managers’ strategic approach to organizational initiatives and
interventions involving systems, processes, structures, technology, human resources, and culture
(Bolman & Deal, 2017; George, 2021; Gilson et al., 2015). Reflection and configuration are
necessary because a customized best-practice strategy aligned with the organization’s needs
facilitates greater engagement and adoption, resulting in more sustainable progress (Kotter,
2012; Lewis, 2011; Oreg & Berson, 2019; Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2018).
Assumed Knowledge Influences Summary
Two tables summarize this section. Table 2 shows the assumed stakeholder knowledge
influences and related literature, and Table 3 encapsulates the key data from this section. Table 3
illustrates the organizational mission, goal, and stakeholder goal, along with the assumed
knowledge influences necessary for ACPO managers to meet the stakeholder goal. Each
assumed knowledge influence was coded with a code used in the data collection and analysis.
The knowledge types are listed in the table and reiterate that this study focused on conceptual,
70

procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. The knowledge influence assessment column
describes the data collection method for the assumed knowledge influences.
71

Table 2
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on ACPO Managers’ Ability to Achieve the
Stakeholder Performance Goal
Assumed knowledge
influences Research literature
ACPO managers need to understand
the relationship between virtual
work and burnout. (Conceptual)
Alarcon, 2011; Allen et al., 2015; Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001; Bakker & Albrecht, 2018;
Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Gajendran &
Harrison, 2007; Rueda, 2011; Maslach & Leiter,
2016; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli et al., 2014;
Tadić et al., 2015
ACPO managers need to know how to
build trust with virtual team
members. (Procedural)
Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001; Azanza et al., 2015; Bakker & Demerouti,
2017; Breuer et al., 2016; Caniëls et al., 2018;
Crawford et al., 2010; Gilbert et al., 2016; Gilson
et al., 2015; Grant et al., 2013; Hacker et al., 2019;
Harvey et al., 2014; Ioannou et al., 2022; Lippert
& Dulewicz, 2018; Lu, 2015; Morrison-Smith &
Ruiz, 2020; Palumbo et al., 2020; Peters et al.,
2014; Schaufeli et al., 2014; Zak, 2017
ACPO managers need to know how to
coach their virtual team members to
excel in a virtual context.
(Procedural)
Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Bentley et al., 2016;
Boyatzis & McKee, 2011; Brim & Asplund, 2009;
Buckingham & Goodall, 2019, Crawford et al.,
2010; Grant et al., 2013; Harvey et al., 2014;
Ioannou et al., 2022; Palumbo et al., 2020; Peters
et al., 2014; Schaufeli et al., 2014; Smith et al.,
2018; Zafari et al., 2019
ACPO managers need to configure
personal virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices that best
help them to mitigate their own
virtual employee burnout.
(Metacognitive)
Ford et al., 2017; Gutermann et al., 2017; Hill &
Bartol, 2016; Krathwohl, 2002; Liao, 2017; Mayer,
2011; Montano et al., 2017; Panteli et al., 2019;
Rueda, 2011
ACPO managers need to configure
best-practice virtual employee
burnout mitigation organizational
strategies that align with their
organization. (Metacognitive)
Bolman & Deal, 2017; George, 2021; Gilson et al.,
2015; Kotter, 2012; Krathwohl, 2002; Lewis,
2011; Oreg & Berson, 2019; Rueda, 2011; Uhl-
Bien & Arena, 2018

72

Table 3
Assumed Knowledge Influences, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence Assessment

Knowledge influence Knowledge type Knowledge influence
assessment
ACPO managers need to understand the
relationships between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. (K-C)
Conceptual Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to know how to
build trust with virtual team members.
(K-P1)
Procedural

Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to know how to
coach their virtual team members to
excel in a virtual context. (K-P2)
Procedural Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to configure
personal virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices that best help
them to mitigate their own virtual
employee burnout. (K-M1)
Metacognitive Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis

ACPO managers need to configure best-
practice virtual employee burnout
mitigation organizational strategies
that align with their organization. (K-
M2)
Metacognitive Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis

Motivation
The second dimension of this KMO analysis is assumed motivational influences on
ACPO managers to achieve their stakeholder goal. Motivation refers to the initiation and
sustainment of goal-directed behavior and consists of active choice, persistence, and effort (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Schunk et al., 2014). Active choice refers to the decision to pursue
a particular goal, persistence refers to a commitment to the goal despite distractions and
challenges, and mental effort refers to the mental work expended and invested in pursuing the
73

goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). For ACPO managers to meet the management
preconditions to reduce virtual employee burnout, they must be motivated to pursue the goal,
remain committed in the face of other priorities, and exert the necessary mental effort to learn,
grow, and achieve progress. The knowledge and organizational needs of the goal will be
insufficient if they are not motivated. Research on motivation has yielded several psychological
constructs to frame motivational generalizations; six of these include self-efficacy beliefs,
attributions and control beliefs, interest and intrinsic motivation, expectancy-value, goals, and
achievement emotions (Pekrun, 2017; Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011). This study focused on three
motivational influences framed by expectancy-value theory, self-efficacy theory, and attribution
theory.
Assumed Motivational Influence 1: ACPO Managers Need to Value the Usefulness of
Management Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation Efforts for Employee Well-Being and
Performance (Expectancy-Value Theory, Utility Value)
Expectancy-value theory proposes that motivation for goal-achievement is attained
through a combination of domain-specific expectations of success and perceived task values
(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). The expectations component is similar to
self-efficacy theory in that it focuses on beliefs about competencies; however, Wigfield and
Eccles (2000) assess domain-specific competence rather than Bandura’s (1997) self-efficacy
theory focus on task-related competence. Ultimately, if people expect to be successful because
they believe they possess the competencies to perform well, they will be more motivated. Task
value is a separate but related construct that proposes that people are more likely to be motivated
if they value the activity in which they are engaged. Task value is further disaggregated into four
components: attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value, and cost. Attainment value
74

emphasizes the importance of doing well in a particular activity, intrinsic value focuses on the
personal enjoyment the activity brings, utility value highlights the usefulness of the activity in
achieving a goal, and cost involves the resource outputs and opportunity costs associated with
the task (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). This study of ACPO managers’ assumed expectancy-value
motivational influence focused on the task value of utility value.
The ACPO managers need to believe that meeting management preconditions for
reducing virtual employee burnout is a useful activity that supports the organizational goal of an
office-wide campaign to mitigate it. This goal further supports the organizational mission by
facilitating a motivated, engaged, high-performing staff with high levels of professional and
personal well-being. Managers who appreciate the usefulness of being educated and resourced to
manage the benefits and challenges of virtual work are motivated to amplify the benefits and
mitigate the challenges (Bloom et al., 2015; Charalampous et al., 2019; Ford et al., 2017; Grant
et al., 2013; Makarius & Larson, 2017; Malhotra et al., 2007; Manca et al., 2018). Likewise,
managers who appreciate the usefulness of being educated and resourced on the nature, causes,
and effects of burnout and engagement, are more likely to be motivated to mitigate burnout and
enhance engagement (Albrecht et al., 2015; Alfes et al., 2013; Bakker et al., 2017; Bedarkar &
Pandita, 2014; Berger et al., 2019; Breevaart et al., 2014; Van Wingerden et al., 2017).
Combining the utility value of education and resources to manage virtual work and burnout,
managers should appreciate the usefulness of the activities in support of their goal.

75

Assumed Motivational Influence 2: ACPO Managers Need to Have Confidence They Can
Meet Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout (Self-Efficacy
Theory)
Self-efficacy theory refers to one’s belief in one’s ability to be successful at a given task
(Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy theory is a component of Bandura’s (2005) social cognitive
theory. Social cognitive theory is a learning theory that frames learning as a process of triadic
reciprocity between three constructs: person, environment, and behavior. Bandura’s significant
contribution and expansion of behaviorist psychology was that our behavior is influenced by our
environment and how we internalize and process both. Further, through self-regulation, we can
adjust our thinking and beliefs, which has a reciprocal effect on our environment and behavior
(Zimmerman et al., 2017). As a component of social cognitive theory, self-efficacy theory
resides in the person construct and reflects one’s self-perception of their competency for
performing a particular activity. Bandura cites five ways that self-efficacy can be influenced: (a)
enactive attainment (doing the activity), (b) vicarious experience (watching others), (c) verbal
persuasion (conversational feedback), (d) physiological states (bodily reactions), and (e) personal
context and outcomes (Bandura, 1997).
Self-efficacy theory relates to motivation in that the more self-efficacy one has for a task,
the more motivated one will be to undertake it. This relationship is built on the premise that the
higher one’s level of self-efficacy, the greater the belief in one’s competence and projected
success rate (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schunk & Usher, 2019). Self-efficacy is distinct from self-
esteem and self-confidence in that self-efficacy is task-specific, while the constructs of self-
esteem and self-confidence are general perceptions of self. Self-efficacy is interconnected with
the three motivational constructs in that high or low levels of self-efficacy will determine one’s
76

willingness to choose a task (active choice), persevere through challenges and distractions
(persistence), and exert the required energies (mental effort) (Rueda, 2011). Perceptions of high
or low efficacy are also self-validating, which can lead to virtuous and vicious cycles of positive
and negative affirmation. High belief in personal competence for a task is likely to lead to better
performance, outcomes, and feedback, further increasing self-efficacy, and low belief is likely to
produce weak performance, outcomes, and feedback, further decreasing self-efficacy (Bandura,
2001).
The assumed self-efficacy motivational need for ACPO managers posits that managers’
level of self-efficacy for meeting the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee
burnout will impact their success. In a study spanning multiple industries and involving 1,200
people in 24 countries, Parker et al. (2020) found approximately 40% of managers doubted their
ability to manage a virtual team. The ACPO’s effectiveness will be compromised if the managers
have low self-efficacy for virtual team management. Likewise, managers’ effectiveness will be
compromised if they have low self-efficacy for managing burnout and enhancing engagement. In
a study involving 714 employees, Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2007)
found that personal resources, including self-efficacy, mediated the relationship between job
resources and engagement/exhaustion. This study supports the findings of other studies that high
self-efficacy is positively related to engagement and negatively related to burnout (Alarcon et al.,
2009; Carter et al., 2018; Karatepe & Demir, 2014; Mäkikangas et al., 2013). Managers’ self-
efficacy for meeting management preconditions to reduce virtual employee burnout will affect
their engagement and burnout and their employees’ success.
The management team’s collective efficacy is also a component of their motivation.
Collective efficacy refers to the team’s perception of their joint competencies to be successful
77

(Bandura, 2000). The ACPO managers are attempting to manage virtual teams as they, too, make
up a virtual team. Their self-efficacy as a virtual team influences their performance (Cordery &
Soo, 2008; Schepers et al., 2011). Their ability to craft their roles as virtual workers, virtual
managers, and a virtual management team will impact their self-efficacy to accomplish the goal
(Chan et al., 2017; Van den Heuvel et al., 2015).
Assumed Motivational Influence 3: ACPO Managers Need to Believe They are Responsible
for Meeting the Management Preconditions They Can Influence (Attribution Theory)
Attribution theory refers to the relationship between perceived causes of outcomes and
the psychological impacts of those perceptions (Weiner, 2005). As outcomes such as success or
failure occur in different domains of life, people attempt to determine why and attribute causes.
The three dimensions of perceived causes within attribution theory are locus, control, and
stability (Weiner, 2005; Perry & Hamm, 2017). Locus refers to the cause being internal or
external to the person, control refers to whether the cause is within or outside the person’s
control, and stability describes whether the cause is permanent or temporary (Rueda, 2011;
Weiner, 2005). Attribution theory is not concerned with whether the perceived causes are
accurate but with how these perceived causes influence actors’ motivation and behavior.
The underlying structure of attributions impacts one’s self-esteem and belief that one can
positively impact desired outcomes (Hareli, 2018). Considering the three dimensions of
attributions for desired outcomes, motivation is likely to be enhanced when actors attribute
internal locus effort (internal) instead of ability (external), deem the outcome controllable
through their interventions, and see the situation as impermanent and subject to change through
their involvement (Schunk et al., 2014). There are scenarios, however, where it may be both
correct and beneficial for an actor to attribute positive and/or negative outcomes to external,
78

uncontrollable, and permanent causes, such as a humble acknowledgement of an inherited
privileged status or a business closure because of a natural disaster (Perry & Ham, 2017).
Optimal attributions motivate actors to take responsibility for outcomes where they can, indeed,
make a difference and deflect responsibility for outcomes truly outside of their influence.
The assumed motivational influence of attribution theory for ACPO managers to achieve
their goal is that they make the optimal attributions for the causes that generate the outcome of
meeting management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout. Some of these
attributions should be internal, controllable, and impermanent, while others should be external,
uncontrollable, and permanent. The managers should take responsibility for meeting
management preconditions. Although the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid digital transformation, and
forced virtual work were uncontrollable, the managers need to believe that they can grow in this
competency through internal effort, including growing in adaptability and learning and applying
virtual management best practices (Manca et al., 2018; Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2018; Weber et al.,
2022). In a qualitative study of remote workers, Charalampous et al. (2022) found that virtual
workers are more engaged when their managers lead by example in virtual work habits and
coach them on virtual work best practices. Further, managers can attribute virtual management
challenges to temporary dynamics associated with the initial shift to remote work rather than
viewing virtual management as inherently and permanently problematic (Dulebohn & Hoch,
2017; Garro-Abarca et al., 2021; Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020).
Managers should not take or bestow full responsibility for burnout on themselves or their
employees, however. They should be careful not to flippantly attribute burnout symptoms in
themselves or their team members to personal shortcomings such as poor time management but
appreciate that there are novel external and uncontrollable factors such as increased work-home
79

conflict, social isolation, and reliance on ICT applications that have to be worked through
(Barber & Jenkins, 2014; Kniffin et al., 2021; Palumbo, 2020; Prasad et al., 2020). In a study of
209 workers forced into virtuality during the COVID-19 pandemic, Galanti et al. (2021) found
that, in many cases, external and uncontrollable factors affect productivity and stress and
implored new virtual managers to attribute performance challenges in themselves and their staff
to these factors. Attributions are important because diagnoses impact motivation to engage,
persist, and apply effort to a proposed solution. Optimal attributions (knowing when and when
not to take responsibility) are likely to motivate managers to pursue meeting their preconditions
of getting educated, supported, and resourced to reduce virtual employee burnout.
Assumed Motivation Influences Summary
Two tables summarize this section. Table 4 shows the assumed stakeholder motivation
influences and related literature, and Table 5 encapsulates the key data from this section. Table 5
illustrates the organizational mission, goal, and stakeholder goal, along with the assumed
motivation influences required for ACPO managers to meet the stakeholder goal. Each assumed
motivation influence was coded with a code used in the data collection and analysis. The
motivation types are listed in the table and reiterate that this study focused on three theoretical
constructs of motivation: expectancy-value theory (utility value), self-efficacy theory, and
attribution theory. The motivation influence assessment column describes the data collection
method for each assumed motivation influence.

80

Table 4
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed motivation
influences
Research literature
Expectancy-value theory (utility
value): ACPO managers need
to value the usefulness of
management virtual employee
burnout mitigation efforts for
employee well-being and
performance.
Albrecht et al., 2015; Alfes et al., 2013; Bakker et al.,
2017; Bandura, 1997; Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014;
Berger et al., 2019; Bloom et al., 2015; Breevaart et
al., 2014; Charalampous et al., 2019; Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002; Ford et al., 2017; Grant et al., 2013;
Makarius & Larson, 2017; Malhotra et al., 2007;
Manca et al., 2018; Van Wingerden et al., 2017;
Wigfield & Eccles, 2000
Self-efficacy theory: ACPO
managers need to have
confidence they can meet
management preconditions to
mitigate virtual employee
burnout.
Alarcon et al., 2009; Bandura (1997, 2000, 2001, 2005);
Carter et al., 2018; Clark & Estes, 2008; Chan et al.,
2017; Cordery & Soo, 2008; Karatepe & Demir, 2014;
Mäkikangas et al., 2013; Parker et al.,2020; Rueda,
2011; Schepers et al., 2011; Schunk & Usher, 2019;
Van den Heuvel et al., 2015; Xanthopoulou, Bakker,
Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2007; Zimmerman et al.,
2017
Attribution theory: ACPO
managers need to believe they
are responsible for meeting the
management preconditions
they can influence.
Barber & Jenkins, 2014; Charalampous et al., 2022;
Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Galenti et al., 2021; Garro-
Abarca et al., 2021; Hareli, 2018; Kniffin et al., 2021;
Manca et al., 2018; Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020;
Palumbo, 2020; Perry & Hamm, 2017; Prasad et al.,
2020; Rueda, 2011; Schunk et al., 2014; Uhl-Bien &
Arena, 2018; Weber et al., 2022; Weiner, 2005

81

Table 5
Assumed Motivation Influences, Motivation Type, and Motivation Influence Assessment

Motivation influence Motivation type Motivation influence
assessment
ACPO managers need to
value the usefulness of
management virtual
employee burnout
mitigation efforts for
employee well-being and
performance. (M-UV)
Expectancy-value theory
(utility value)
Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to have
confidence they can meet
management preconditions
to mitigate virtual
employee burnout. (M-SE)

Self-efficacy theory Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to
believe they are responsible
for meeting the
management preconditions
they can influence. (M-A)
Attribution theory Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis

Organization
The third dimension of this KMO analysis is the assumed organizational influences on
ACPO managers’ ability to achieve their stakeholder goal of meeting management preconditions
to reduce virtual employee burnout. Organizational influences on stakeholders refer to
organizational elements, including organizational structure, policies, practices, processes, and
resources (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). These influences aggregate to form an
organizational culture that overtly and covertly influences the organization’s vision, values,
beliefs, behaviors, and operations (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein & Schein, 2017).
82

Theoretical conceptualizations of organizational culture are beneficial to understanding
how organizational barriers could impact ACPO managers’ ability to accomplish their goal.
Schein & Schein (2017) asserted that organizational culture is an organization’s accumulated
learning that forms a pattern of unconscious beliefs, values, and behaviors and can be analyzed
through consideration of observable artifacts, espoused beliefs and values, and unconscious
assumptions. Schneider et al. (1996) distinguished between organizational culture and climate,
with culture being what employees believe their organization values and climate being the
employee experience of the organization’s policies, practices, and procedures. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) made a similar distinction with what they define as two cultural units of
analysis: cultural models and cultural settings. Cultural models refer to shared mental schema
and normative understandings in an organization, which are so ubiquitous that they are invisible.
Cultural settings, however, refer to the concrete social contexts where cultural models are
enacted and visibly manifested (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). These three conceptualizations
each highlight the distinction between the invisible and visible dimensions of organizational
culture and the reciprocal relationship between the two dimensions. This study leveraged
Gallimore and Goldenberg’s (2001) cultural models and cultural settings as the two types of
organizational influences on the stakeholder.
Assumed Organizational Influence 1: The Organization Needs to Value a Comprehensive and
Unified Management Approach to Mitigating Virtual Employee Burnout (Cultural Model)
A cultural model refers to the shared intangible values and beliefs that frame normative
understanding within an organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). As a cultural model,
managers need to perceive an organizational value for a comprehensive and unified management
approach to managing virtual employees and mitigating virtual burnout. If they do not believe
83

this is an organizational value, there may be no collective motivation to tackle the issue, and each
manager will address it in their own way, if at all (Rueda, 2011). Moreover, a personally
anecdotal and disunified approach with no structural expectations elicits high levels of manager
variance, potentially generating confusion and operational conflicts (Bolman & Deal, 2017).
Disunified managers crafting different policies and procedures for their employees may also
generate perceptions of inequity (Graham et al., 2021; Leslie et al., 2012). For example, if one
manager mandates core working hours and another allows workers to reduce work-home conflict
by allowing flexible work hours, the former manager’s staff may feel unfairly treated, especially
if they have high work-home conflict levels, as in the case of caretakers. Managers need to sense
that the organization values a comprehensive and unified approach that requires them to be
attentive to, measure, and control for burnout (Schein & Schein, 2017).
A unified management approach to overcoming organizational challenges is a key
element of strategic leadership and organizational change management (Kotter, 2012; Lewis,
2011). An organizational value for a comprehensive and unified approach to managing virtual
employee burnout is fairly novel; however, organizations that value a unified management
approach to managing virtual work and managing burnout, respectively, are more likely to have
managers who are engaged and committed to the process (Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; de Vries et
al., 2019; Gajendran et al., 2015; Gutermann et al., 2017; Loi et al., 2014; Montano et al., 2017).
These values would be evidenced in formal and informal dialogue and meetings between
managers and plans for a comprehensive and unified approach that facilitates the amplification
of virtual work benefits and minimization of virtual work challenges, along with the optimization
of job demands and enhancement of job resources. A perceived organizational value of a
comprehensive and unified management approach would theoretically prompt managers to
84

collaborate and create enacted structures, policies, and procedures to support the cultural value
(Bolman & Deal, 2017; Schneider et al., 1996).
Assumed Organizational Influence 2: Managers Need Training to Mitigate Virtual Employee
Burnout (Cultural Setting)
Cultural settings refer to the concrete social contexts where cultural models are enacted
and tangibly realized (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The organization’s provision of required
resources to train and equip managers is an experiential manifestation of its belief that managers
having what they need to mitigate virtual employee burnout is an organizational priority.
Organizations that ensure their staff members’ (including managers) resource needs are met are
more likely to realize better outcomes (Odden & Picus, 2011; Waters et al., 2003). Training is
one of the key resources an organization can provide to bolster engagement and performance as
it facilitates the necessary knowledge, skills, and motivation (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009;
Grossman & Salas, 2011; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Moreover, learning and
development, as an umbrella term for training, is a job resource in the JD-R model that buffers
job demands (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
To mitigate virtual employee burnout, managers need training on the benefits and
challenges of virtual work, the causes and outcomes of burnout and engagement, and the
relationships between these constructs; additionally, they need to be trained on personal and
management best practices (Hammer et al., 2016; Hill & Bartol, 2016; Juan et al., 2018;
Malhotra et al., 2007). From a technical perspective, since the majority of work performed and
collaborated on in virtual contexts is done via ICT applications, managers would also benefit
from focused training on the most widely used ICT applications in their office (Gilson et al.,
2015; Laitinen & Valo, 2018). This training would help them, and their staff, by teaching them
85

shortcuts and functionalities to get work done more efficiently. Mitigating virtual burnout also
involves training managers on using ICT applications to connect and disconnect from work
(Dery & Hafermalz, 2016; Hill & Bartol, 2018; Maier et al., 2015). An effective training
approach could leverage sociocultural theory to teach the required knowledge and skills and
facilitate a community of exploration for managers to exchange stories and insights from their
virtual management journeys (Wenger et al., 2002).
Assumed Organizational Influence 3: Managers Need Clear Policies and Procedures to
Facilitate Their Management of Virtual Employee Burnout (Cultural Setting)
Organizational policies and procedures reflect the cultural setting as they frame what,
when, where, and how work is performed (Rueda, 2011). As elements of the realized context
where work is performed, policies and procedures also can influence the cultural model by
cultivating and/or challenging unconscious beliefs and values (Schneider et al., 1996). Policies
and procedures, along with systems and processes, foster needed accountability and align
workers with clear guidance, structure, and expectations (Bolman & Deal, 2017; Olsen, 2014).
The ACPO managers need organizational policies and procedures related to managing
virtual workers to achieve their goal of meeting management preconditions to reduce virtual
employee burnout. Beneficial virtual management policies and procedures include guidance
around managing employees’ schedules, work alignment, work-home integration, ICT usage,
team cohesion, and productivity (Butts et al., 2015; Felstead & Henseke, 2017; Kim et al., 2018;
Liao, 2017; Marlow et al., 2017; Van der Lippe & Lippényi, 2020; Zafari et al., 2019). Further,
managers need clear policies and procedures on virtual performance management to confidently
frame and track employee performance and well-being in all these areas (Albrecht et al., 2015;
Bakker & Albrecht, 2018; Buckingham & Goodall, 2019; Mone & London, 2018). Performance
86

management consistency across the management team aids cohesion and cultivates the
organizational value that managing virtual employee burnout is a top management priority.
Lastly, the organization needs to provide equity-minded policies and procedures that
acknowledge different home situations amongst the staff and give managers discretion to manage
employees accordingly (Graham et al., 2021; Lyttelton et al., 2022; Rudolph & Baltes, 2017;
Troup & Rose, 2012).
Assumed Organizational Influences Summary
Two tables summarize this section. Table 6 shows the assumed stakeholder
organizational influences and related literature, and Table 7 encapsulates the key data from this
section. Table 7 illustrates the organizational mission, goal, and stakeholder goal, along with the
assumed motivation influences required for ACPO managers to meet the stakeholder goal. Each
assumed organizational influence is coded with a code used in the data collection and analysis.
The organizational culture types are listed in the table and reiterate that this study focused on two
organizational culture dimensions: cultural models and culture settings. The organizational
influence assessment column describes the data collection method for each assumed
organizational influence.

87

Table 6
Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal
Assumed organization
influences
Research literature
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified
management approach to
mitigating virtual employee
burnout. (Cultural model)
Ale Ebrahim et al., 2009; Bolman & Deal, 2017; de
Vries et al., 2019; Gajendran et al., 2015; Gallimore
& Goldenberg, 2001; Graham et al., 2021;
Gutermann et al., 2017; Kotter, 2012; Leslie et al.,
2012; Lewis, 2011; Loi et al., 2014; Montano et al.,
2017; Rueda, 2011; Schneider et al., 1996; Schein &
Schein, 2017
Managers need training to mitigate
virtual employee burnout.
(Cultural setting)
Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007;
Dery & Hafermalz, 2016; Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001; Gilson et al., 2015; Grossman & Salas, 2011;
Hammer et al., 2016; Hill & Bartol, 2016; Hill &
Bartol, 2018; Juan et al., 2018; Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016; Laitinen & Valo, 2018; Maier et
al., 2015; Malhotra et al., 2007; Odden & Picus,
2011; Waters et al., 2003; Wenger et al., 2002
Managers need clear policies and
procedures to facilitate their
management of virtual employee
burnout. (Cultural setting)
Albrecht et al., 2015; Bakker & Albrecht, 2018;
Bolman & Deal, 2017; Buckingham & Goodall,
2019; Butts et al., 2015; Felstead & Henseke, 2017;
Graham et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2018; Liao, 2017;
Lyttelton et al., 2022; Marlow et al., 2017; Mone &
London, 2018; Olsen, 2014; Rudolph & Baltes,
2017; Rueda, 2011; Schneider et al., 1996; Troup &
Rose, 2012; Van der Lippe & Lippényi, 2020; Zafari
et al., 2019

88

Table 7
Assumed Organizational Influences, Organizational Culture Type, and Organizational Influence
Assessment

Organizational influence Organizational culture type Organizational influence
assessment
The organization needs to
value a comprehensive and
unified management
approach to mitigating
virtual employee burnout.
(O-CM)
Cultural model Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Managers need training to
mitigate virtual employee
burnout. (O-CS1)
Cultural setting Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Managers need clear policies
and procedures to facilitate
their management of virtual
employee burnout. (O-CS2)
Cultural setting Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis

Conceptual Framework for Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee
Burnout
The review of the literature on virtual work, burnout, management best practices for
managing virtual work and burnout, and Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework
informed the development of a conceptual framework for meeting management preconditions to
mitigate virtual employee burnout. This conceptual framework highlights management’s
moderating role in amplifying virtual work benefits, minimizing virtual work challenges,
optimizing job demands, and enhancing job resources, thereby facilitating greater engagement,
less burnout, and improved job performance. Incorporating Clark and Estes’s gap analysis,
89

assumed KMO influences on managers’ ability to meet management preconditions for mitigating
virtual employee burnout are examined to determine needs and assets. These validated needs and
assets then inform recommended solutions for managers to meet management preconditions,
strengthening their ability to positively impact virtual work practices and mitigate employee
burnout.

90

Figure 7
Conceptual Framework for Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout

91

Conclusion
The research on management preconditions for mitigating virtual employee burnout
illuminated the emergence and growth of literature on virtual work and burnout since the last
quarter of the 20th century. Global forces, including the proliferation of digital technology and
the COVID-19 pandemic, have expanded virtual work to an unprecedented scale that is
irreversible. Burnout syndrome is also a growing phenomenon as workers experience greater job
demands without the requisite matching job resources. Conflating these two constructs, there is
evidence that the unmanaged challenges of virtual work could exacerbate the symptoms of
burnout syndrome, resulting in a large-scale diminution in performance and employee well-
being. This review proposed literature-based conceptualizations of virtual employee burnout and
management best practices for mitigating it. Adapting Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis
framework into an innovation model, it also offered a prescriptive conceptual framework for
managers to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. Chapter
Three will outline the methodological design for data collection and analysis of the assumed
KMO influences on ACPO managers’ ability to achieve their stakeholder goal.

92

Chapter Three: Methods
The purpose of this innovation study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for ACPO managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal. The analysis commenced by generating a list of literature-based
assumed influences required for ACPO managers to accomplish their goal and then
systematically examined the listed influences to ascertain root needs and assets. While a
complete analysis would have focused on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder
of focus in this analysis was the ACPO management team. The questions that guided this gap
analysis were the following:
1. What are the ACPO management team’s knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs related to meeting the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical framework for
identifying, assessing, and closing organizational performance gaps. Performance gaps are
established through observable and measurable shortfalls between performance goals and actual
performance, then diagnosed through the lens of three dimensions: KMO influences (Clark &
Estes, 2008). This study adapted Clark and Estes’s gap analysis framework into an innovation
model to identify and examine ACPO managers’ assumed KMO needs to reach their
performance goal related to achieving management preconditions for reducing virtual employee
93

burnout. Assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were generated and
explored based on context-specific research as well as general learning and motivation theory.

Figure 8
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Framework Adapted to an Innovation Model

94

Overview of Design
The research design was a mixed-methods design. A mixed-methods design incorporates
elements of both qualitative and quantitative approaches and produces complementary insights
not afforded by solely using one or the other (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This research design aligns with a pragmatist paradigm of inquiry
leveraged for problem solving and providing practical solutions for improving current and future
practice (Saunders et al., 2019). Since Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis was leveraged as a
prescriptive framework to explore assumed a priori KMO influences impacting a problem of
practice, a pragmatist paradigm of inquiry with a mixed-methods design was most appropriate
(Osanloo & Grant, 2016). The strategy of the mixed-methods approach was an explanatory
sequential design. An explanatory sequential design consists of two phases of data collection –
the first phase involves quantitative data collection and analysis, which informs and compliments
subsequent qualitative data collection and analysis (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
The quantitative phase of the study used surveys as a data source, and the qualitative
phase used document analysis and interviews as data sources. The assumed KMO influences
were investigated through these data sources and coded accordingly. Table 8 shows that all data
sources corresponded with the study’s two research questions. The triangulation of the three data
sources strengthens the study’s validity (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Morgan, 2014).
Triangulation describes the process of leveraging multiple methodologies and data sources to
study a specific phenomenon (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The study’s methodological design is
explained in this chapter to verify the study’s credibility (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). The
remainder of this chapter will discuss the following methodological considerations: (a)
participating stakeholders, (b) data collection and instrumentation, (c) data analysis, (d)
95

credibility and trustworthiness, (e) validity and reliability, (f) ethics, (g) the role of the
investigator, and (h) limitations and delimitations.

Table 8
Data Sources
Research questions Surveys Interviews
Document
analysis
What are the ACPO management team’s
knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs related to meeting the
management preconditions for reducing virtual
employee burnout?
X X X
What are the recommended knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational solutions?
X X X

96

Participating Stakeholders
The accountability arrangements supported the conclusion that the management team was
the stakeholder group with the most power to facilitate sustainable change by meeting
management preconditions for addressing virtual employee burnout before implementing the
office-wide campaign. Thus, the ACPO managers were selected for participation in this study.
The organizational performance goal was that, by December 2024, all employees would
participate in an office-wide campaign to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The non-
management team members were the stakeholders closest to the epicenter of power to enact the
most change on their virtual burnout; however, their efforts would be stifled if management
preconditions for addressing this issue were not first satisfied. This determination was made by
considering ACPO’s internal accountability dynamics. Management preconditions included
being educated, supported, and resourced with team members and with the organization as a
structural whole. Failure to accomplish this goal before the non-management staff engaged in the
office-wide campaign risked a failed campaign due to managers not having prior essential
knowledge about this issue, lacking motivation to engage their staff on the issue, and not having
the proper organizational supports to equip themselves and the staff. To accomplish the
organizational goal, the supporting stakeholder goal was that, by May 2024, all ACPO managers
meet the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout by 100%.

97

Figure 9
ACPO Management Organizational Chart, and Data Source Criteria

Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
As stated in the research questions, this study aimed to investigate a priori assumed KMO
influences required for ACPO managers to meet their stakeholder goal and develop informed
98

solutions. The survey’s design corresponded with these aims. The criteria for the target survey
respondent sample also aligned with the study’s purpose and conceptual framework, further
strengthening the study’s credibility, validity, and reliability (Locke et al., 2010).
Criterion 1: ACPO Management Team Members
Participants had to be members of the ACPO management team. As managers, they
possessed knowledge and experience related to management challenges and best practices within
their organization. They also possessed the capability to amend employees’ job demands and
resources.
Criterion 2: Managers Who Primarily Work Virtually
Participants had to primarily work virtually. As virtual managers, they possessed first-
hand awareness of the challenges and benefits of virtual work and how these benefits and
challenges impacted their sense of engagement and burnout.
Criterion 3: Managers Who Manage Direct Reports Who Primarily Work Virtually
Participants had to manage virtual employees. As virtual managers managing virtual
employees, participants possessed knowledge and experience of the challenges and best practices
of managing virtual employees within the context of their organization. They also possessed the
capability to moderate virtual work’s benefits and challenges regarding job demands and
resources and coach employees on job crafting and self-undermining behaviors.
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The participants were recruited through non-probability purposive sampling. Non-
probability purposive sampling identifies a target population representative of the population to
the best of a researcher’s knowledge (Fink, 2016; Pazzaglia et al., 2016). The ACPO
management team was the target population, and all seven managers were recruited to take the
99

survey. Although a small quantitative sample, this sampling strategy aligned with the study’s
conceptual framework and research questions. The management team’s assumed KMO
influences were most appropriately investigated through their direct engagement in the study.
This sampling strategy also supported the study’s efficient progression and convenience, as the
managers were willing and available to participate. Driving survey engagement through
convenience, the Qualtrics online survey tool was leveraged to administer a questionnaire
designed and coded to explore the specific literature-based KMO influences (Sue & Ritter,
2012). Following a virtual meeting with the PA to explain the survey’s nature and role in the
study, the PA emailed the management team, notifying them of the upcoming survey request
email and encouraging their participation.
Following the order of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, the quantitative
survey data was collected prior to qualitative data collection via interviews. The additional
document analysis qualitative data collection method was also performed prior to the interviews.
The survey and document analysis data informed the open-ended probes of the interviews,
allowing the interviews to explain and expand upon previously collected data. The three-data-
source strategy facilitated data triangulation and enhanced internal validity (Creswell & Plano
Clark, 2017).
Document Analysis Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Document analysis is a qualitative research data collection method involving systematic
review and evaluation of printed and electronic content (Bowen, 2009; Johnson & Christensen,
2020). ACPO documents relevant to this study’s purpose, research questions, and conceptual
framework were requested, reviewed, and interpreted to garner additional insight into the KMO
needs of ACPO managers to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
100

Criterion 1: ACPO Organizational Statements, Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals
These documents referenced the desired culture and overarching objectives of the
organization.
Criterion 2: ACPO Annual Employee Feedback Survey Report
These documents highlighted employees’ general satisfaction and outlined their
sentiments related to components of engagement, burnout, and virtuality.
Criterion 3: ACPO Virtual Work Policies and Procedures
These documents illustrated ACPO’s expectations for virtual work arrangements,
including work schedules, technology proficiencies, and managing the work-home interface.
Criterion 4: ACPO Staff ’s Performance Management Templates
These templates displayed expectations for employees on performance-related
components of engagement, burnout, and virtuality.
Document Analysis Sampling (Access) Strategy and Rationale
Pre-existing organizational documents provided background information and historical
context for the study (Bowen, 2009; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Johnson and Christensen (2020)
described official documents as anything written or recorded by an organization. Accessing,
reviewing, and interpreting official ACPO documents was a rich and efficient data source for the
study. Access was granted to the criteria documents after an email was sent to the PA describing
the desired documents and their relevance to the study. Digital documents were shared through a
secure cloud drive. All documents were redacted to preserve the anonymity of ACPO staff. In
addition to evaluating the documents for managers’ KMO needs for mitigating virtual employee
burnout, the documents were also analyzed prior to interviews to inform interview probes and
after interviews to corroborate interview and survey responses. The document analysis
101

investigated evidence of ACPO management’s (a) conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
knowledge for managing virtual employee burnout, (b) motivations for mitigating it, and (c)
components of the cultural model and setting related to this issue.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The rationale for the interview sampling criteria was consistent with the rationale for the
survey sampling criteria. Interview participants aligned with the study’s research questions,
conceptual framework, and aim. The criteria also required that participants have the ability to
provide rich information, qualitative insights, in-depth explanations, and relevant examples of
the KMO influences being investigated (Burkholder et al., 2020; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
interview sampling criteria were also aligned with the explanatory sequential design of the study,
ensuring interview participants had first completed the survey component of the study (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018).
Criterion 1: ACPO Management Team Members
Participants had to be members of the ACPO management team. As managers, they
possessed knowledge and experience related to management challenges and best practices within
the context of their organization. They also possessed the capability to amend employees’ job
demands and resources.
Criterion 2: Managers Who Primarily Work Virtually
Participants had to primarily work virtually. As virtual managers, they possessed first-
hand awareness of the challenges and benefits of virtual work and how these benefits and
challenges impacted their sense of engagement and burnout.

102

Criterion 3: Managers Who Manage Direct Reports Who Primarily Work Virtually
Participants had to manage virtual employees. As virtual managers managing virtual
employees, participants possessed knowledge and experience of the challenges and best practices
of managing virtual employees within the context of their organization. They also possessed the
capability to moderate the benefits and challenges of virtual work on job demands and resources
and coach employees on job crafting and self-undermining behaviors.
Criterion 4: Managers Who Completed the Survey Protocol and Agreed to Be Interviewed
Within the explanatory sequential design of the study, interviews are conducted after
surveys. In this design strategy, the quantitative data in the surveys can inform the interview
protocol (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). Before being interviewed, ACPO managers must first
complete the survey protocol. Additionally, interview participants had to consent to be
interviewed (Locke et al., 2010; Patton, 2014).
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
Consistent with the survey recruitment strategy, the interview participants were also
recruited through non-probability purposive sampling aligned with the study’s purpose, research
questions, and conceptual framework (Fink, 2016; Pazzaglia et al., 2016). The ACPO
management team was the target population, and all seven managers who completed the survey
were recruited to participate in the interview protocol. Each manager was sent an email
reiterating the purpose of the study and requesting consent to participate in a 45-minute virtual
video-call interview. The sample of seven interview participants was sufficient as common
themes coalesced among interview participants’ responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This
recruitment strategy was aligned with the study’s conceptual framework and facilitated the
study’s expedience.
103

The ACPO managers were willing and available to discuss questions related to their
KMO factors related to mitigating their staff’s virtual burnout. The interview protocol attained
100% participation from ACPO managers. To extrapolate qualitative data related to the study, a
semi-structured interview protocol was used, which afforded the flexibility to build on survey
responses, probe deeper into interview responses and participant reactions, and explore
consistent themes with participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014). Table 9 outlines the
holistic sampling strategy across all three data collection sources.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Inquiry is the systematic process of unpacking data in the search for knowledge on a
particular topic or problem (Malloy, 2011). A systematic approach, abiding by academic
standards, attempts to contribute trustworthy, credible, valid, and reliable findings to the subject
of study (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). This research rigor helps to mitigate the weaknesses of
anecdotal claims and biased conclusions (Duke & Martin, 2011). This study employed a
pragmatist paradigm of inquiry to explore and recommend research-based and data-driven
solutions to an organizational problem of practice. Combining deductive and inductive
approaches, this approach engaged the spectrum of research paradigms to solve an intractable
problem (Saunders et al., 2019). The conceptual framework adapted Clark and Estes’s (2008)
gap analysis into an innovation model to assess literature-based assumed KMO needs of a
stakeholder group most able to address the problem.

104

Table 9
Sampling Strategy

Sampling strategy Sample population
Surveys Non-probability purposive sampling aligned
with the study’s conceptual framework
and research questions. Sampling strategy
also supported the study’s efficient
progression and convenience.
Seven members of the
ACPO management
team.
Document
analysis
Pre-existing organizational documents that
fit sampling criteria and made accessible
by ACPO managers

Interviews Non-probability purposive sampling aligned
with the study’s conceptual framework
and research questions. Sampling strategy
also supported the study’s efficient
progression and convenience.
Seven members of the
ACPO management
team who completed the
survey.

Given the paradigm of inquiry and conceptual framework, a mixed-methods explanatory
sequential design was deemed most appropriate. This design triangulated data from quantitative
and qualitative sources to deliver a multi-sourced evaluation and prescriptive plan to address the
problem. The following sections will discuss each source of data along with respective
instrumentation for investigating ACPO managers’ assumed KMO influences required to
mitigate virtual employee burnout. The University of Southern California’s (USC) Institutional
Review Board (IRB) reviewed and approved these instruments. All study participants received
an information sheet ahead of time explaining the study.
105

Surveys
As sources of quantitative data, surveys help answer descriptive questions, questions
about the relationships between variables, and predictive relationships between variables over
time (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Surveys are an effective and efficient research method for
quantitatively describing a target population’s attributes, behaviors, abilities, attitudes, and
thoughts (Robinson & Leonard, 2018). The development and administration of this study’s
survey instrument were carefully undertaken to ensure validity and reliability.
The literature review informed the development of this study’s survey. While there was
no established survey instrument for managing virtual employee burnout, there were prior
instruments for evaluating burnout and engagement, respectively. The Gallup Employee
Engagement Survey, Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale (MBI-GS), OLBI, and UWES
were leveraged in the development of the engagement and burnout components of this study
(Gallup, 2020; Halbesleben and Demerouti, 2005; Maslach et al., 1996; Schaufeli & Bakker,
2010; Schaufeli et al., 2019). Survey questions addressing virtual work arrangements were
informed by multiple instruments developed by fellow virtual work researchers for specific
studies (De Spiegelaere et al., 2016; Gajendran et al., 2015; Makarius & Larson, 2017;
Messenger et al., 2017; Sarbu, 2018).
Once developed, reviewed, and approved by USC’s IRB, the survey instrument was
administered in August 2022 to all seven ACPO managers through email notifications using
Qualtrics survey software. The survey was open for 1 week, with a reminder notification email
sent out 2 days after the initial notification and a final reminder email on the day the survey was
scheduled to close. The instrument, outlined in Appendix C, contained 30 questions consisting of
27 four-level Likert-scale questions and three open-text response questions. The survey took
106

respondents an average of 8 minutes to complete. Consistent with the study’s conceptual
framework, the survey instrument coded questions to align with the assumed KMO influences of
ACPO managers to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Knowledge-related questions assessed ACPO managers’ knowledge about virtual work’s
benefits and challenges, employee engagement, employee burnout, and the relationships between
these constructs. The survey also explored ACPO managers’ knowledge of best practices for
managing virtual employees and mitigating employee burnout. Motivation-related questions
evaluated ACPO managers’ self-efficacy, utility value, and attribution motivational constructs
for addressing the problem. Organization-related questions investigated participants’ perceptions
of organizational resources, training, policies and procedures, and management cohesion related
to managing virtual employee burnout. Inquiry into each of these Clark and Estes (2008)
components provided holistic and helpful insights for understanding managers’ needs for
meeting their stakeholder goal.
Documents
Documents as data sources refer to a wide spectrum of written, digital, visual, and
physical content pertaining to a study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Document analysis is an
unobtrusive, nonreactive qualitative methodological approach that corroborates with other
methodologies and data sources to strengthen a study’s trustworthiness through triangulation
(Bowen, 2009). Knowledge and insights gained from document analysis informed interview
questions, provided supplemental information, and verified data from the survey and interview
data collection methodologies and sources. Further, document analysis sheds light on internal
goals, strengths, tensions, and challenges related to the study (Bowen, 2009). One of the unique
107

value propositions of documents as a data source is their stability; the data is not impacted by the
reaction of researchers or participants in the data collection process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The analyzed documents aligned with the study’s conceptual framework investigating
ACPO managers’ KMO needs to meet the stakeholder goal of meeting management
preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The requested documents included ACPO’s
organizational statements (vision, mission, values, goals), annual employee survey report, virtual
work policies and procedures, and staff performance management templates. The documents
were requested from the PA, who had an assigned ACPO director redact staff’s identity
information and share the documents through a secure cloud drive. The documents were then
scanned, reviewed, and coded to correspond with the assumed ACPO managers’ KMO
influences. This process was performed over 2 weeks. The documents elucidated managers’
attempts to cultivate and operationalize desired behaviors and culture and how employees
responded to these efforts. They also illustrated how the management team responded to the
pivot to virtual work and the symptoms of employee burnout over time. The documents provided
valuable empirical knowledge and background understanding of the ACPO context in which
managers were attempting to manage virtual workers.
Interviews
As a qualitative research method, interviews support the understanding of context,
meaning, process, and nuance in social phenomena through an inductive approach (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Interviews facilitate a directed conversation between a researcher and study
participants. The participants of the study’s interview phase were the purposeful sample of the
seven ACPO management team members. A semi-structured interview method facilitated
consistent questions across interviewees while anticipating probes to further explore participants’
108

responses (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). The conceptual framework best aligned with a semi-structured
interview approach as it was not restricted to the rigidity of a structured interview approach, nor
was it suited to an open-ended interview approach given the investigation of a priori assumed
influences.
The interview protocol, depicted in Appendix D, was developed and coded to correspond
with the literature-based assumed KMO influences of the managers to meet their stakeholder
goal. There were 17 total interview questions in the protocol. The questions were reviewed and
amended to eliminate leading questions and researcher-held biases (Burkholder et al., 2020).
Probes were also prepared for several questions to drill down on participant responses, if
appropriate. Given the availability and time commitments of the management team, the
interviews were designed to last 45 minutes. The information garnered in this time block was
sufficient due to triangulation with the data from the other two sources.
The interviews were conducted over a 1-week period a week after the survey
administration in August 2022. Document analysis was also completed before the interview
protocol. Interview request notifications were emailed to all seven ACPO managers who
previously completed the survey instrument and reviewed the information sheet. The email
requested their participation in a 45-minute one-on-one virtual interview as an additional data
collection method for the research project. The interviews were conducted over the
videoconferencing software, Zoom. The software’s recording and transcription functionalities
were leveraged to capture and study the interview conversations. The recordings and
transcriptions were then analyzed and coded for noteworthy convergent and divergent themes.
109

Data Analysis
The data were analyzed in a manner consistent with the study’s explanatory sequential
mixed-methods design involving two phases of data collection (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Independent analyses of the quantitative survey and qualitative document databases informed the
qualitative interview open-ended probing and subsequent analysis. Further, the interview data
helped to explain some of the data gathered from the surveys and documents. Insights from all
three sources were then integrated by connecting the quantitative results to the qualitative data
collection to provide triangulated conclusions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Patton, 2014). Unlike
a convergent design, the databases were not merged; instead, the quantitative data informed the
qualitative data collection, and the qualitative data explained and expanded the quantitative
findings. In this study design, comparisons between data sets were not necessary.
The quantitative data gathered through Qualtrics surveys were analyzed with descriptive
statistics. Using numerical details to assess the data, numerical trends elucidated managers’
perceptual themes and the relationships between said themes (Alkin & Vo, 2017). Ordinal
measurements from the survey’s Likert scales facilitated analyses of frequencies, standard
deviations, percentages, and central tendencies (Fink, 2016; Salkind, 2017). Aligned with the
conceptual framework and research questions, the descriptive analysis corresponded with the a
priori constructs for KMO influences required for managers to meet the preconditions for
mitigating virtual employee burnout. Analysis of the quantitative patterns and themes revealed
significant information about the managers’ needs and assets.
Qualitative data from document analyses, interview transcriptions, and post-interview
memos were analyzed using a multi-step process involving data review, coding, and reporting
(Harding, 2018). Document analyses were revisited following the interviews to assess
110

explanatory or divergent information in light of rich interview data. This process, consistent with
the conceptual framework and research questions, was undertaken to investigate the a priori
assumed KMO influences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Codes were also created for emergent
themes within the pre-established constructs. The a priori coding facilitated both deductive and
inductive insights. Open coding was leveraged to analyze themes, assess typicality and
atypicality, and compile overarching axial codes associated with the respective KMO influences
(Harding, 2018). Per Harding (2018), all codes were documented in a codebook that served as a
central reference for thematic analysis, relationships, and interpretations. A summative analysis
of all data sources provided a holistic assessment of the aggregate findings (Miles et al., 2018). A
descriptive report presented the general findings of the analysis.

111

Figure 10
Triangulated Data Collection and Analysis Design for Investigating ACPO Managers’ Assumed
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Needs for Meeting their Stakeholder Goal

Credibility and Trustworthiness
The qualitative component of this mixed-methods study employed high standards of
qualitative trustworthiness attained through measures to ensure credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Being shaped by a constructivist
paradigm of inquiry, qualitative research cannot be held to the same positivist standard of truth
as quantitative research (Aliyu et al., 2015). Instead of accuracy in finite terms, credibility pays
careful attention to a research process that prioritizes believability and plausibility (Rubin &
Rubin, 2011). Multiple interviews, along with multiple data sources, including documents,
facilitated credibility through triangulation (Patton, 2014). A thick description of the context and
112

setting was also provided to foster reader transferability (Johnson & Christensen, 2020).
Intentional focus was consistently on outlining the study’s logic and tracing each step to make
the research process dependable. The audit trail provided a straightforward pathway to confirm
where, how, and from whom data was collected. For example, retrieval of the documents directly
from the ACPO management team ensured their authenticity and credibility through verification
of their origin and authorship (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Lastly, consistent reflexivity and
critical examination of personal biases, assumptions, values, background, and relationships with
study participants, forced my positionality awareness and further buffeted threats to credibility
and trustworthiness (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Validity and Reliability
Requisite measures were taken to ensure the survey’s internal and external validity and
reliability. Validity refers to the accurate measurement of an appropriate construct for the subject
under investigation (Maxwell, 2013). The study’s a priori nature meant assumed influences were
evaluated with the objective of validation. The influences were coded into the survey questions
to ensure the instrument evaluated the intended constructs, strengthening internal validity. The
prescriptive and specific organizational nature of the study also meant the goal of the quantitative
component of the study was not to explicitly apply the variable relationships across multiple
contexts; however, the extensive literature review strengthened the external validity by framing
the assumed influences from literature spanning multiple contexts (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Reliability refers to the consistency of an instrument and the likelihood it will produce the same
results over time (Salkind, 2017). The use of established survey instruments on components of
the study aided internal reliability, and transparency about study methods, protocols and
sampling criteria facilitated external reliability (Johnson & Christensen, 2020). Table 10 captures
113

the entirety of the study’s assumed KMO influences, along with their respective assessment
methods.

Table 10
Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences With Respective Assessment
Methods

Influences Type Assessment
methods
Knowledge
ACPO managers need to understand
the relationships between virtual
work, engagement, and burnout. (K-
C)
Conceptual Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to know how to
build trust with virtual team
members. (K-P1)
Procedural Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to know how to
coach their virtual team members to
excel in a virtual context. (K-P2)
Procedural Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to configure
personal virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices that best
help them to mitigate their own
virtual employee burnout. (K-M1)
Metacognitive Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to configure
best-practice virtual employee
burnout mitigation organizational
strategies that align with their
organization. (K-M2)
Metacognitive Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Motivation
ACPO managers need to value the
usefulness of management virtual
employee burnout mitigation efforts
Expectancy-value
theory (utility value)
Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
114

Influences Type Assessment
methods
for employee well-being and
performance. (M-UV)
ACPO managers need to have
confidence they can meet
management preconditions to
mitigate virtual employee burnout.
(M-SE)
Self-efficacy theory Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
ACPO managers need to believe they
are responsible for meeting the
management preconditions they can
influence. (M-A)
Attribution
theory
Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Organizational
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified
management approach to mitigating
virtual employee burnout. (O-CM)
Cultural model Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Managers need training to mitigate
virtual employee burnout. (O-CS1)
Cultural setting Surveys
Interviews
Document analysis
Managers need clear policies and
procedures to facilitate their
management of virtual employee
burnout. (O-CS2)
Cultural setting Surveys
Interviews
Document Analysis

Ethics
This study involving human subjects required the necessary approval of the USC IRB. In
the process, IRB certification was obtained from the Collaborative Institutional Training
Initiative. To meet IRB requirements for the exempt review category, guided by the ethical
principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and respect, the study employed six practices to
maintain the highest of ethical standards: (a) informed consent to participate, (b) voluntary
115

participation, (c) confidentiality, (d) right to withdraw without penalty, (d) separate permission to
record, and (e) secure data storage (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
purpose of the study and the ethical standards were reviewed holistically with the organization
and study participants before each interaction (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). To protect confidentiality,
surveys did not request names and interviews were anonymized. All data was stored in
password-protected digital cloud files, and audio files were destroyed upon transcription
(Maxwell, 2013). In all data presentations and dissertation text, participants were identified using
pseudonyms. To uphold the highest standards of academic integrity, no compensation or external
incentives were granted in relation to this study (Glesne, 2016). Further, there were no credibility
threats related to power dynamics or coercion. The agency and anonymity of participants were
prioritized at all stages of the study. Conscientious efforts were taken to consider and eliminate
any possible harm to research participants. Lastly, the study was reviewed by a doctoral
committee and USC personnel to rule out any possible ethical considerations before publication.
Role of Investigator
As the principal investigator, my positionality informs the study’s participants and
readers about how my personhood and relationships influenced my approach and interpretations.
My relationship with the setting and participants resided in my role as a management consultant.
I offered prior advisory services to the organization for 4 years on various organizational
effectiveness projects. The past consultant relationship implied that I had a history of working
with the organization, not for the organization. My outsider positionality afforded me the
opportunity to study the organization’s managers without power imbalances, personal job role, or
career ladder concerns (Glesne, 2016). Consistent reflexivity mitigated my reactivity in the data
116

collection process (Maxwell, 2013). The participants and readers were assured the study was
strictly for academic purposes; I was not compensated by the organization or any other sponsor.
Axiology refers to how a researcher’s underlying values and ethics impact their
methodological choices and execution (Aliyu et al., 2015; Saunders et al., 2019). I am guided by
the value of improving human quality of life. Forces such as digitization, globalization, and the
COVID-19 pandemic have had and will continue to have a major impact on human quality of life
(Bonnet & Westerman, 2021; Brougham & Haar, 2018). The growth of virtual work has not only
impacted productivity and organizational performance, but it has also impacted how people live
(Allen et al., 2015; Boell et al., 2016). The second-, third-, and fourth-order effects of the rapid
mass transition to remote and hybrid work arrangements will have profound economical,
sociological, and psychological ramifications for the near- and long-term future (Barrero et al.,
2021; Iansiti & Richards, 2020). The organization of study was a microcosm for me to explore
this major shift. My pragmatist axiology supported a mixed-methods explanatory sequential
design inclusive of surveys, interviews, and document/artifact analysis. I hope that this study will
benefit all ACPO staff and fellow scholars and practitioners navigating the topic of virtual
employee burnout.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations refer to elements of the study beyond the researcher’s control (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Limitations of this study included limited data collection sources, the
challenges of participant feedback, and the duration of the study. Firstly, regarding limited data
collection sources, while the seven managers were a rich source of qualitative information, a
survey sample of seven is a small population for quantitative data analysis. However, the
organizational focus, along with drilling down to a specific stakeholder group, justified this
117

limitation. The qualitative document analysis was also limited to the documents the organization
made accessible. I was unable to retrieve relevant documents on my own; as such, the
organization self-selected the documents they shared based on comfort levels and disclosure
criteria.
Secondly, the survey and interview data collection sources relied on ACPO managers’
personal feedback. Participant feedback has limitations, including time-sensitivity, spontaneous
answers, momentary perceptions, exaggeration, and the possibility of respondents calculating
socially acceptable, politically neutral answers that might not reflect their true thoughts and
feelings. The interaction between a researcher and participants also produces limitations such as
reactivity, in which participants’ responses are influenced by the interaction’s dynamics
(Maxwell, 2013). Similar to boundaries with document accessibility, my outsider positionality
may also have negatively impacted participant transparency. Thirdly, the study's cross-sectional
nature meant the data collection was limited to a fixed moment in time; a longitudinal study
would have tracked data over a longer period to assess consistency over time (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The limitations of each data source were acknowledged, and mitigation attempts
were pursued through a mixed-methods design that triangulated data collection methodologies
and sources (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Patton, 2014).
Delimitations refer to researcher-imposed limitations on the study (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). The conceptual framework and stakeholder group of focus were conscious delimitations.
The study's conceptual framework limited the lens for investigating virtual burnout management.
The innovation model adaptation of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framed this study as a
prescriptive approach to diagnosing and solving an organizational problem. This delimitation
made the study context-specific and impacted generalizability. One aim of the extensive
118

literature review was to offset generalization and transferability concerns associated with this
delimitation. Further, the context-specific approach enables future researchers and practitioners
to consider the unique organizational presentations and precursors of virtual employee burnout.
Although different organizations have peculiar nuances, this study’s approach can be leveraged
in any organization.
Another delimitation was the isolation of a specific stakeholder group (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011). I focused solely on the ACPO managers. This strategic delimitation
prioritized the stakeholder group at the epicenter of power to impact the problem of unknown
and unrealized management preconditions for mitigating virtual employee burnout. Although a
critical element, the role of employees in mitigating their own burnout was not the focus of this
study. I designed this limitation as I believed employee attempts to address virtual burnout would
be stifled if management preconditions were not first met. This limitation also corresponded with
my need for convenience and access while conducting the study.
119

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The purpose of this innovation study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for ACPO managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal of meeting management preconditions to reduce virtual employee
burnout by 100%. The research questions that guided this needs analysis study were:
1. What are the ACPO management team’s knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs related to meeting the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions?
Adapting Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework into an innovation model,
Chapter Two detailed the incorporation of assumed literature-based KMO influences into a
prescriptive conceptual framework for managers to meet preconditions to mitigate virtual
employee burnout. Chapter Three outlined how the assumed influences would be explored and
validated through a mixed-methods explanatory sequential study. The explanatory sequential
design consisted of two phases of data collection. The first phase consisted of quantitative data
collection and analysis, surveys, which informed the second phase of qualitative data collection
and analysis, document analysis and interviews. Further, as illustrated in Figure 10, the
qualitative phase offered explanations and expansions of the quantitative data. This chapter will
discuss the study’s findings on the validity of each of the 11 assumed influences in alignment
with the methods and sources outlined in Tables 8 and 10. The survey, document analysis, and
interview findings for each assumed influence will be reviewed, along with validation
conclusions based on the data analyses.
120

Participating Stakeholders
Consistent with the study’s purpose and research questions, the ACPO management team
was the participating stakeholder group to determine management needs and assets. The
management team’s demographic data were not relevant to the study; therefore, none were
collected. The management team consisted of seven individuals: the PA, three directors who
oversee functional programs, and three managers who support one of the directors. The average
tenure of employment at ACPO for the management team was 20 years; the average tenure on
the management team was 8 years. The study achieved 100% participation, with all management
team members completing the surveys and participating in the interviews. The team also
provided all requested documents for document analysis. In the following analysis, management
team members are referred to in accord with the order of their survey and interview responses.
Survey respondents will be referred to as S1–S7, and interview participants will be referred to as
I1–I7.
Determination of Assets and Needs
To investigate the assumed KMO influences, the study leveraged a mixed-methods
design consisting of quantitative data collected through surveys and qualitative data collected
through document analysis and interviews. This design triangulated data from the quantitative
(surveys) and qualitative (interviews and document analysis) sources to deliver a multi-sourced
evaluation of the assumed influences. The surveys informed the subsequent document analysis
and interviews, while the document analysis explained and expanded upon the survey responses.
The study design did not necessitate data set mergers and comparisons as it explored how the
data sets complemented one another in exploring the assumed influences. Corroborating all three
121

data sources supported richer and more accurate assessments than conclusions taken from each
data source on its own.
This chapter detailing the data analysis and findings outlines the process to determine if
the assumed influences on managers’ ability to achieve their stakeholder goal are needs or assets.
Validated influences will be deemed needs, and unvalidated influences will be deemed
management team assets. To determine needs and assets, the findings of the three data sources
were weighted according to the strength of the data source to assess the management team’s
influence. The interview data collection source was ascribed 50% weight because of the richness
of the data gathered through in-depth conversations and contextualization. The survey source
was ascribed 40% weight, as it offered descriptive statistical analysis on each influence. As the
only secondary data source, document analysis was ascribed 10% weight. The summative
analysis of data from the three sources provided a holistic assessment of the aggregate findings.
The stakeholder group’s 100% participation further strengthened the study. The capture of all
managers’ survey data provided a comprehensive quantitative analysis that achieved statistical
validity, and their interview participation facilitated data saturation that captured core themes.
The results section below is organized according to KMO influences. The data analysis
facilitated the determination of assumed influences as either needs or assets. These findings
ensured the solutions proposed in Chapter Five targeted data-supported weaknesses and
strengths. Table 11 describes the need and asset threshold criteria.

122

Table 11
Threshold Criteria for Needs and Assets
Assessment Threshold
Need Aggregate data sources showed evidence supporting the
influence was 75% or greater
Asset Aggregate data sources showed evidence supporting the
influence was below 25%

Results and Findings
The results and findings for each influence based on their respective data source are
outlined in this section, followed by a need or asset determination based on the aggregate
findings.
Knowledge Influences
For ACPO managers to achieve their goal, it is assumed they need a certain set of
knowledge. Three categories of knowledge were investigated: conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive. Conceptual knowledge describes knowledge of categories, classifications,
relationships, theories, and models. Procedural knowledge refers to knowledge of subject-
specific skills, techniques, methods, and combinations thereof for application. Metacognitive
knowledge describes self and strategic knowledge, along with knowledge of inherent cognitive
processes, contextual conditions, and self-regulatory capabilities that frame said knowledge. The
results and findings were organized by knowledge type and corresponding assumed influences.
Table 12 summarizes the knowledge influence, knowledge type, assessment sources, and
need/asset determinations. The remainder of the knowledge section details the data for each
influence and explains the triangulated validation assertion.
123

Table 12
Knowledge Influences and Validation Summary
Knowledge influence Need or asset
ACPO managers need to understand the relationships between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout.
Asset
ACPO managers need to know how to build trust with virtual team
members.
Need

ACPO managers need to know how to coach their virtual team members to
excel in a virtual context.
Need
ACPO managers need to configure personal virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices that best help them to mitigate their own virtual
employee burnout.
Need

ACPO managers need to configure best-practice virtual employee burnout
mitigation organizational strategies that align with their organization.
Need

Conceptual Knowledge
Conceptual knowledge describes knowledge of categories, classifications, relationships,
theories, and models. The assumed conceptual knowledge influence was managers’
understanding of the triadic relationship between virtual work, engagement, and burnout.
ACPO Managers Need to Understand the Relationships Between Virtual Work, Engagement,
and Burnout
Survey Results. The survey instrument had four items to assess this assumed conceptual
knowledge influence, and the results were 100% agreement with all. The survey results
demonstrated that ACPO managers understood the relationships between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. The survey items for assessing conceptual knowledge were limited to
perceived self-knowledge of virtual burnout concepts. The interview protocol expanded on this
124

perceived self-knowledge to investigate their actual knowledge of key virtual burnout concepts.
The survey findings suggested the assumed conceptual knowledge influence was a management
team asset. Figures 11, 12, 13, and 14 show the questions and survey results.

Figure 11
Survey Results for Q.1

Note. Survey item: “I understand the triadic relationship between virtual work, engagement, and
burnout.”

125

Figure 12
Survey Results for Q.2

Note. Survey item: “I understand how the benefits of virtual work can positively impact work.”

Figure 13
Survey Results for Q.3

Note. Survey item: “I understand how the challenges of virtual work can increase burnout.”

126

Figure 14
Survey Results for Q.4

Note. Survey item: “I understand how engagement and burnout are negatively related (more
engagement/less burnout; more burnout/less engagement).”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained three questions related to the
conceptual knowledge influence. The first question evaluated managers’ understanding of the
relationship between engagement and burnout, the second question assessed their knowledge of
virtual work components that impact burnout, and the third asked about their knowledge of
virtual work components that could increase employee engagement.
The interview responses to the first question on understanding the relationship between
engagement and burnout found 71% of managers were misaligned with the literature on the
relationship between engagement and burnout. The most common misunderstanding of the
relationship between engagement and burnout was the sentiment that engagement can lead to
burnout. I1 stated, “I think there’s a fine line between burnout and being engaged.” I3 asserted,
“at some point, you can become so engaged that it’s too much.” Similarly, I5 said, “It seems to
127

me there comes a point when engagement starts to tilt in a negative direction and become
burnout.” This view of engagement was not consistent with the literature’s assertion that
engagement has a negative relationship with burnout. Engagement refers to a positive, fulfilling,
work-related mindset inclusive of vigor, dedication, and absorption. I2 and I7 understood this
view of engagement and the relationship with burnout. I2 said, “the less engagement, the more
inclined employees are to burn out,” and I5 responded, “I think employees who are engaged tend
to be less burned out.”
Managers’ responses to the second question revealed that all understood virtual work
impacts on burnout. They highlighted components including working longer hours, non-stop
accessibility, social isolation, increased distractions at home, and technology challenges. I2
commented that virtual work means employees are “able to work at any hour of the night without
drawing a line in their schedule.” I3 echoed this sentiment, saying that “work is at your fingertips
at any minute of the day.” I1 and I5 discussed social isolation, describing feelings of “being
alone.” I5 and I7 both stated distractions from spouses and children could take a toll on work
focus. I4 mentioned technological overstimulation with ICT applications involving
videoconferencing, live chats, emails, and non-stop notifications from various software
applications evoking feelings of stress.
The third interview question to assess this influence considered knowledge of virtual
work components that could increase employee engagement. The responses demonstrated all
managers understood how virtual work could increase engagement. They were aware of
engagement increasing virtual work components such as increased flexibility, autonomy,
productivity, and work-home balance. I3 said, “you don’t have as much direct physical
oversight; you have more flexibility.” I1 and I7 also spoke about flexibility during the day to run
128

errands and tend to personal and family appointments. All managers commented on the stress
relief of not having to commute back and forth from the office. I2 and I6 asserted that working
virtually made them more engaged with colleagues as the structured format of virtual meetings
has forced them to pay more attention to colleagues and get to know them on a more personal
level. I4 is a caregiver for aging parents and stated that virtual work has “made me put off
retiring as I have the ability to take care of my parents while I am working; I wouldn’t have been
able to do this if I was in the office.”
Weighing the three questions equally, two of the three questions (67%) suggested
managers already demonstrate this conceptual knowledge influence. Despite the need for a
stronger understanding of the relationship between employee engagement and burnout, they
unanimously understand how the components of virtual work impact burnout and engagement.
The interview findings for the conceptual knowledge influence suggest an understanding of the
relationship between virtual work, engagement, and burnout is an asset the managers already
possess.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence include
organizational statements, annual employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures,
and performance management templates.
The organizational statements consisted of the organization’s vision, mission, guiding
principles, and goals. The organization’s mission is “to support the needs of County departments
to improve the quality of life for taxpayers.” The vision is “to be a premier purchasing office that
is a cornerstone for the County’s growth and prosperity.” The guiding principles are
“professionalism, innovation, and equity.” Core competencies corresponding to the guiding
principles included professional development, time mastery, shared accountability, continuous
129

process improvement, customer-centricity, effective communication, personal character,
organizational citizenship, and cohesion. These statements express high expectations yet also
reflect a people-driven culture. The staff-related goals for 2021 and 2022 outlined learning and
development initiatives and a response to key feedback items in the annual employee survey.
The statements demonstrated that the leadership aimed to develop staff and cultivate an open
culture where evolving employee needs could be met; however, there was not enough evidence
in the statements to determine the managers’ understanding of the relationship between virtual
work, engagement, and burnout.
The annual employee surveys for 2021 and 2022 revealed that burnout was, indeed, a
concern for employees, including managers. In the qualitative survey questions, employees
commented on an excessive workload and feeling over-extended. Employees also discussed
some of the challenges of remote work, including social isolation, team collaboration, and
managing the work-home interface. Despite the challenges, employees greatly appreciated the
benefits of working from home and did not want to return to the office. The employee feedback
suggested the employees, including the managers, understood the relationship between virtual
work, engagement, and burnout.
The virtual work policies and procedures were created before the office-wide pivot to
virtual work and did not reflect the present virtual work practice. The policy limited teleworking
to 1 day a week, employees had to meet certain eligibility criteria, and they had to sign a
telework agreement. The policy contained several restrictions to ensure teleworkers protected
organizational data and did not abuse their work-from-home flexibility. The absence of content
addressing virtual burnout in the virtual work policies and procedures suggested a lack of
understanding of the relationship between virtual work, engagement, and burnout.
130

The performance management templates reviewed include the “Continue, Start, Stop”
(CSS) form used in trimester check-ins, the annual review, performance improvement plan, oral
reprimand, written reprimand, and trainee employee evaluation forms. The templates contained
open-text boxes for managers to document the behaviors of recognition and/or concern. The
annual review rated employees on the nine core competencies correlated with the guiding
principles. There was no evidence in these templates of an understanding of the relationship
between virtual work, engagement, and burnout.
The document analysis for this assumed influence found one source inconclusive, one
suggesting this was already a management asset and two suggesting this was a management
need. Weighing the four documents equally, the document analysis suggested this is a valid
need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed conceptual knowledge
influence was not validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources determined this
influence to be an asset.
Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge refers to knowledge of subject-specific skills, techniques,
methods, and combinations thereof for application. The assumed procedural knowledge
influences were managers’ knowledge of how to build trust and how to coach virtual team
members.
ACPO Managers Need to Know How to Build Trust With Virtual Team Members
Survey Results. The survey item for this procedural knowledge influence assessed
managers’ knowledge of the best literature-based combination of management behaviors to build
trust with colleagues. From a list of 14 behaviors, managers were directed to choose the eight
131

that were most effective in building trust amongst virtual team members when practiced
simultaneously. Six managers selected four of these, and one selected five, resulting in an
aggregate score of 52%. The survey results showed fractional knowledge of how to build trust
most effectively with virtual team members. The survey results suggested this influence was a
need. Table 13 details the managers’ selections. The emboldened behaviors are the eight
literature-based behaviors that, when practiced simultaneously, are most effective for building
trust.

132

Table 13
Survey Results for Q.5
Management behaviors S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Lead by example X X X X

X
Recognize excellent performance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Design difficult but achievable challenges

Protect them from unwarranted criticism

Give them freedom to regulate how to do their work

✓

✓

✓ ✓
Be objective and minimize emotions X

X

X
Enable employees to craft elements of their role ✓

✓ ✓ ✓
Share information broadly

✓

✓

Give clear direction

X X X X X X
Intentionally build relationships ✓

✓ ✓

Invest in whole-person growth

✓

✓

Listen more than you speak X X X X X X

Be vulnerable ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Solicit their feedback X X X X X X X
Number of most effective behaviors selected 4 4 4 4 4 5 4

Note. Survey item: “Please select the eight management behaviors that when performed
simultaneously, most effectively build trust with team members.”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this procedural
knowledge influence. The question asked managers what they knew about the best combination
of manager behaviors to build employee trust.
133

The interviews found managers did not know the literature-based best-practice
combination of manager behaviors to build employee trust. They believed strongly in the
importance of trust among colleagues and spoke highly of the trust they shared; however, they all
relied on anecdotal best practices. Despite not demonstrating knowledge of the literature-based
best-practice combination of behaviors, all managers’ responses contained one or a few of the
literature-based best practices. I1 and I7 were proponents of organizational transparency; I1
commented, “It is impossible to overshare information,” and I7 said, “We have to be transparent
with the business and share why we are doing what we are doing.” I1, I2, I6, and I7 all had an
aversion to micromanaging, implying they subscribed to the literature-based best practices of
giving employees the freedom to regulate how they do their work and craft elements of their
role. I6 stated, “I try to give enough room to let people do their own driving.” I2 and I7 spoke
about vulnerability, including sharing personal and professional challenges and victories; I7 said,
“We have to be comfortable discussing the fact that everyone has learning opportunities,
including me.” I4 pointed out the importance of recognition for building trust: “It is important to
recognize when someone goes above and beyond, especially working remotely.” The managers
were passionate about building and sustaining trust, but their procedural knowledge was
incomplete and misaligned with the literature-based best practices. The interview findings
suggested this assumed influence is a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were annual
employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures, and performance management
templates.
The annual employee surveys did not have questions to rate managers’ trust-building
behaviors specifically, but, as illustrated in Table 14, some questions reflected a few of the
134

literature-based best practices. The qualitative feedback within the surveys also indicated high
levels of trust in the leadership. These results implied a culture of trust and suggested the
management team knows the best-practice combination of behaviors to build trust with
employees.

Table 14
Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Building Trust
Percentage of staff
agreement/satisfaction
Survey item 2021 2022
My manager listens to what I have to say. 96% 96%
How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive
for doing a good job?
84% 90%
Managers communicate the goals of the organization. 93% 96%

135

The virtual work policies and procedures did not explicitly mention trust-building
practices. In addition to parameters and criteria, the policy addressed employee expectations and
management responsibilities for teleworkers. An excerpt from the policy describes the mutual
relationship.
The manager and the employee must review and discuss the Standard terms of the
telework agreement so that both fully understand what is expected of each of them. The
manager and the employee negotiate the employee specific terms that complete the
telework agreement with descriptions of the job functions to be done, the specific
telework space to be used and all other aspects of teleworking that are unique to the
employee.
The policy appeared to leave room for managers and employees to discuss ideal arrangements;
however, it does not provide ample evidence to evaluate managers’ trust-building practices.
There were explicit mentions of trust in the performance management templates. In the
annual review and trainee employee evaluation, the ratings sections for “collaboration and
teamwork” and “organizational citizenship” competencies contain language that states, “we work
inclusively to build trust and accomplish tasks, goals, and initiatives.” There were no best
practices asserted for how to build this trust, though. There were no other explicit mentions of
trust in the performance management documents. Most documents contained sections for
employees to formally comment on their evaluations, suggesting a culture of transparency. The
performance management documents did not contain sufficient evidence to evaluate managers’
trust-building practices.
The document analysis for this influence found one source that suggested managers
already possessed this influence as an asset and two sources that implied a value of trust but had
136

insufficient evaluation evidence for management practices. Taken holistically, the document
analysis suggested this assumed influence is an asset.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed procedural knowledge
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirms this is a need.
ACPO Managers Need to Know How to Coach Their Virtual Team Members to Excel in a
Virtual Context
Survey Results. The survey item for the second procedural knowledge assumed
influence assessed managers’ knowledge of management behaviors that, when performed
simultaneously, most effectively coached virtual team members to excel in a virtual context.
Given a list of eight behaviors, managers were directed to choose the four behaviors that, when
simultaneously practiced, were most effective for coaching team members. Six managers
selected two of the four most effective behaviors, and one selected three of the eight, resulting in
an aggregate score of 54%. The survey results showed incomplete procedural knowledge of how
to coach virtual team members most effectively to excel in a virtual context. The survey results
suggested a partially validated influence. Table 15 details the manager’s selections. The
emboldened behaviors are the four literature-based behaviors that, when practiced
simultaneously, are most effective for coaching virtual team members to excel.

137

Table 15
Survey Results for Q.6
Management behaviors S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Help them with time management X

X

X X
Acknowledge when they are doing a good job

✓

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Share your own weaknesses X X

X

Share reactions to their performance as personal
reflections, not statements of fact

Make discussions about their wins your highest
priority
✓

✓ ✓

✓

Explain what they need to do to improve work-life
balance
X X X
Hold them accountable to office policies

X

X

X
Explore solutions with them you know they will feel
confident about
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

✓
Number of most effective behaviors selected 2 2 2 3 2 2 2

Note. Survey item: “Please select the four management behaviors that when performed
simultaneously, most effectively coach virtual team members to excel in a virtual context.”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
procedural knowledge influence. The question asked managers what they knew about the best
combination of manager behaviors to coach their employees to excel in a virtual context.
The interviews found no managers knew the literature-based best-practice combination of
manager behaviors to coach employees. The managers primarily alluded to anecdotal best
practices and structural performance management mechanisms. Coaching was generally framed
138

around performance management timelines, clear expectations were set at the beginning of the
performance cycle, and managers coached to close performance deficits. Regarding best
practices, I4 admitted, “I don’t really have a set of coaching best practices; that is an area I need
to improve.” Some managers’ responses contained components of the literature-based best
practices. Several managers pointed out the importance of acknowledging when team members
are doing a good job. I3 said a best practice is to “champion whatever positives can be found in a
situation,” reflecting the literature-based best practice of making discussions about employee
wins the highest priority. I4 stated the practice of asking employees, “What do you think is the
best way to handle this situation?” This practice is consistent with the literature-based best
practice of framing solutions about which employees will feel great. Although some managers’
responses aligned with the literature-based practices, the overall interview responses suggested
this is a validated influence and, therefore, a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this assumed influence were
annual employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures, and performance
management templates.
The annual employee survey reports contained relevant data on managers’ ability to
coach virtual employees. The 2021 and 2022 surveys were conducted while the office was fully
remote. Table 16 shows the responses to questions relevant to managers’ knowledge of how to
coach virtual employees. The qualitative survey responses indicated employees appreciated
managers’ coaching and professional support. These documents suggested managers knew how
to coach virtual team members to excel in a virtual environment.

139

Table 16
Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Manager Feedback
Percentage of Staff
Agreement/Satisfaction
Survey item 2021 2022
I feel valued and appreciated 83% 92%
How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive
for doing a good job?
84% 90%
Discussions with my manager about my performance
are worthwhile
93% 96%
My manager has spoken with me about my performance
in the past 6 months.
98% 96%
The management team demonstrates support for work-
life balance.
91% 96%
Overall, how satisfied are you with your immediate
manager?
98% 96%

The virtual work policies and procedures did not provide evidence of managers’ use of
best-practice coaching procedures. The policy outlined the manager-employee relationship to
determine ideal telework arrangements but did not specify how managers should give feedback.
The virtual work procedure checklist offered tactical direction on remote system accessibility
and communications guidelines but did not discuss manager feedback to strengthen virtual
employees. There was not enough evidence in the policies and procedures to determine if
managers knew how to best coach virtual employees.
The performance management documents suggested managers did not have procedural
knowledge on how to best coach employees to excel in a virtual context. The documents focused
on ratings and performance gaps rather than accentuating employee strengths. Some documents,
including the CSS and annual review, contained sections that facilitated discussion on employee
140

strengths, but holistically, the documents evaluated performance ascribed by core competencies
and employee objectives and mechanized manager direction to close performance gaps.
The document analysis for this assumed influence found one source that suggested
managers already possessed this influence as an asset, one inconclusive source, and one that
suggested this was a valid influence. Weighing the three sources equally, the documents did not
provide conclusive evidence that this was a need or asset.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed procedural knowledge
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirmed this is a
need.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Metacognitive knowledge describes self and strategic knowledge, along with knowledge
of inherent cognitive processes, contextual conditions, and self-regulatory capabilities that frame
said knowledge. The assumed metacognitive knowledge influences were managers’
configuration of personal virtual burnout best practices and best-practice organizational
strategies.
ACPO Managers Need to Configure Personal Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation Best
Practices That Best Help Them to Mitigate Their Own Virtual Employee Burnout
Survey Results. The survey item for this assumed influence offered two questions for
managers to engage in a metacognitive exercise to reflect on how they configure and reconfigure
personal best practices to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The first question evaluated how
managers configure their best practices to mitigate personal burnout. The results found 14% of
managers reflected on research-driven best practices to configure a set of best practices; the other
86% stated anecdotal best practices. The second question evaluated how managers would
141

reconfigure their best practices in the event of future burnout. The results found all managers
would rely on anecdotal best practices in their reconfiguration exercise. These survey results
suggested this assumed metacognitive knowledge influence is a need. Figures 15 and 16 show
the survey questions and responses.
Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
metacognitive knowledge influence. The question asked managers how they configure a set of
personal virtual burnout mitigation best practices. There was also a probing question to explore
how they would reconfigure their best practices in the event of future burnout.
No managers reflected on literature-based best practices when configuring their best
practices to mitigate burnout. They generally referred to their own anecdotal best practices.
When prompted to reflect on how they developed their best practices, most managers responded
they developed them through personal experience and various sources over time. I1 stated, “I
know what works best for me.” I4 commented, “I go with my gut,” and I6 said, “I haven’t read
anything, but I train myself on it.” They did not recall a reflective process through which they
configured the practices, but they asserted they instituted well-being behaviors throughout their
career, such as taking breaks from screen time, going for walks, task planning, and disconnecting
from work for a period. I2 and I3 referred to the “50/10 rule,” in which they take a 10-minute
break after each 50-minute period of focused work. I6 talked about “turning the computer and
phone notifications off,” and I7 said, “I reflect on my goals and ask myself what I need to do to
meet them.”
When asked about reconfiguring best practices in the event of future burnout, the overall
response was that they would evaluate their performance on their original best practices and then
execute them better. I3 responded, “I would hold myself more accountable to executing the
142

things I know,” and I7 said, “I would ask myself if I am actually performing the activities that I
set out for myself.” I5’s response reflected a promising metacognitive practice: “I would do
some research and read articles from, like, the Harvard Business Review to figure out what
strategies I could adopt. I would then try out a few of them and see which ones worked for me.”
This response expressed researching literature-based best practices in the event of future burnout
but implied this research was not previously done to configure current best practices. Overall, the
managers did not reflect on literature-based best practices to configure or reconfigure their
burnout mitigation best practices. The interview responses suggested this is a need.

143

Figure 15
Survey Results for Q.7

Note. Survey item: “Please reflect and share in the text box below how have you gone about
configuring a set of best practices to mitigate your own burnout?”

144

Figure 16
Survey Results for Q.8

Note. Survey item: “If you recognize in the future that you are feeling burned out, please share in
the text box below how will you go about reconfiguring your best practices?”

Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were virtual work
policies and procedures and performance management templates.
Both sets of documents had no references to personal burnout. The virtual work policies
and procedures did not mention configuring personal burnout mitigation best practices. The
policies and procedures emphasized ensuring staff provided the same level of service, security,
and accessibility as they did in-office. The performance management documents did not directly
145

facilitate conversation or reflection on burnout mitigation best practices. The open-ended
sections of the performance documents could theoretically be leveraged to facilitate reflections
on burnout mitigation best practices; however, this would only be the case if either a manager or
employee surfaced virtual burnout as a problem. The documents afforded no direct opportunities
for managers to explore their pre-existing knowledge of the topic and best align their knowledge
with their needs. There were also no prompts to reflect and evaluate progress based on a set or
criteria. The analysis of these documents suggested this assumed influence is a need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed metacognitive knowledge
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirmed this is a
need.
ACPO Managers Need to Configure Best-Practice Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation
Organizational Strategies That Align With Their Organization
Survey Results. The survey item for this assumed influence offered two questions for
managers to engage in a metacognitive exercise to reflect on how they configure and reconfigure
best-practice virtual employee burnout mitigation organizational strategies. The first question
evaluated how they configure best-practice organizational strategies to mitigate their employees’
burnout. The results found 14% of managers would reflect on research-driven best-practice
organizational strategies to reconfigure a set of best practices; the other 86% stated anecdotal
best-practice strategies. The second question evaluated how managers would reconfigure best-
practice organizational strategies in the event of future burnout within the organization. The
results found 86% of them would rely on anecdotal best-practice organizational strategies in their
reconfiguration process. These survey results suggested this assumed influence is a need. Figures
17 and 18 show the survey responses.
146

Figure 17
Survey Results for Q.9

Note. Survey item: “Please reflect and share in the text box below how you go about configuring
a set of best-practice organizational strategies to mitigate burnout amongst employees?”

147

Figure 18
Survey Results for Q.10

Note. Survey item: “If you recognize in the future that there is a burnout problem within the
organization, please share in the text box below how will you go about reconfiguring best-
practice organizational strategies to deal with the problem?”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
metacognitive knowledge influence. The question asked managers how they configure a set of
best-practice strategies to mitigate burnout among employees. The interview results were that no
managers reflected on literature-based best practices. The managers generally referred to their
148

own anecdotal best practices, including discussions with other managers, connecting with
employees to gauge burnout levels, soliciting employee feedback, suggesting employees take
time off, delegating some of their workload, and exploring resources offered through the
employee assistance program. I7 summed up the general practice by saying, “I think it’s just
about talking to your employees and getting their feedback in a group and individually, and then
sitting down to come up with a plan.”
When asked to reflect on how they developed their best-practice strategies for employees,
most managers said their strategies for helping employees stemmed from their own personal best
practices. I2 responded, “The things that I feel like work for me are things that I feel can be
globally applied to other people because they’re human.” I3 said, “I refer to my own personal
experiences and management experiences and reflect on those to configure what I share with
employees.” I5’s response was different from the other managers: “I’d probably have to do some
research to educate myself, and then I would sit down with them and propose some strategies.”
I5’s response expressed the noble intent to research literature-based best practices but implied
this research was not previously done to configure current best-practice strategies to mitigate
virtual employee burnout. The interview responses demonstrated managers do not reflect on
literature-based best-practice strategies to configure burnout mitigation strategies for employees.
The interview responses suggested this assumed influence is a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were virtual work
policies and procedures and performance management templates. Both sets of documents had no
reference to burnout among employees. The virtual work policies and procedures did not
mention configuring best-practice organizational burnout mitigation strategies. The policies and
procedures emphasized ensuring staff provided the same level of service, security, and
149

accessibility as being in-office. The performance management documents did not directly
facilitate conversation or reflection on organizational burnout mitigation strategies. The
documents afforded no direct opportunities for managers to explore their pre-existing knowledge
of the topic and best align their knowledge with the organization’s needs. There were also no
prompts to reflect and evaluate organizational progress based on a set or criteria. The analysis of
these documents suggests this assumed influence is a need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed metacognitive knowledge
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of triangulated sources affirmed this is a need.
Motivation Influences
The second dimension of needs analysis is assumed motivational influences on ACPO
managers to achieve their stakeholder goal. For ACPO managers to meet the management
preconditions to reduce virtual employee burnout, they must be motivated to pursue the goal,
remain committed in the face of other priorities, and exert the necessary mental effort to learn,
grow, and achieve progress. This study focused on three motivational influences framed by
expectancy-value theory, self-efficacy theory, and attribution theory. The results and findings are
organized by the motivational theories and their corresponding assumed influences. Table 17
summarizes the motivation influence, motivation type, assessment sources, and need/asset
determinations. The remainder of the motivation section details the data for each assumed
influence and explains the triangulated validation assertion.

150

Table 17
Assumed Motivation Influences and Validation Summary
Motivation influence Need/asset
ACPO managers need to value the usefulness of management virtual
employee burnout mitigation efforts for employee well-being and
performance.
Asset
ACPO managers need to have confidence they can meet management
preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Asset
ACPO managers need to believe they are responsible for meeting the
management preconditions they can influence.
Asset

Expectancy-Value (Utility)
Expectancy-value theory proposes that motivation for goal-achievement is attained
through a combination of domain-specific expectations of success and perceived task values. The
task value investigated was utility value which explores the perceived usefulness of an activity in
achieving a goal. The assumed expectancy-value influence is that ACPO managers need to
believe that meeting management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout is a useful
activity that supports the organizational goal of an office-wide campaign to mitigate it.
ACPO Managers Need to Value the Usefulness of Management Virtual Employee Burnout
Mitigation Efforts for Employee Well-Being and Performance
Survey Results. The survey instrument had five questions to assess this assumed
motivation influence. The results found 100% agreement with all five questions related to the
expectancy-value motivation influence. ACPO managers unanimously agreed that their efforts to
mitigate virtual employee burnout were useful for employee well-being and performance. The
151

survey results suggested this influence is an asset. Figures 19–23 show the questions and survey
results.

Figure 19
Survey Results for Q.11

Note. Survey item: “My efforts to get educated and resourced on the benefits and challenges of
virtual work will be useful for my direct reports’ performance.”

152

Figure 20
Survey Results for Q.12

Note. Survey item: “My efforts to get educated and resourced on the benefits and challenges of
virtual work will be useful for my direct reports’ well-being.”

Figure 21
Survey Results for Q.13

Note. Survey item: “My efforts to get educated and resourced on burnout syndrome will be
useful for my direct reports’ performance.”
153

Figure 22
Survey Results for Q.14

Note. Survey item: “My efforts to get educated and resourced on burnout syndrome will be
useful for my direct reports’ well-being.”

Figure 23
Survey Results for Q.15

Note. Survey item: “My efforts to get educated and resourced on virtual employee burnout will
be useful for the entire staff’s performance and well-being.”
154

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
expectancy-value motivation influence. The question asked managers how they thought
management’s virtual burnout mitigation efforts were useful for employee performance. There
was also a probing question on how managers believed their virtual burnout mitigation efforts
were useful for employee well-being.
The interviews found all managers believed management efforts to mitigate virtual
burnout were useful for employees’ performance. Managers believed their attempts to help
employees mitigate burnout would illustrate their care, personalize their working relationship
with direct reports, and motivate them to do a good job. I1 responded, “When employees know
that we care about them and we want to address personal needs to the extent that we can, they
perform better.” I5 said, “Knowing that I care and that they can trust me absolutely motivates
them to continue to perform and push through.” I2 replied, “I feel like they’re going to be more
inclined to excel,” and I6 commented, “The work probably gets done better because they don’t
feel like they have to rush.” The interviews also found all managers believed management efforts
to mitigate burnout were useful for employee well-being. I2 stated, “Performance and well-being
go hand in hand.” I6 said, “We have to go back to being holistic type of people and recognize
that the edges of people’s lives come into their work.” I7 discussed how people’s work lives
impact their personal lives and the better they feel about work, the better their overall well-being.
I5 asserted, “I am confident that management intervening in this way would help both
employees’ performance and well-being.” The interview results suggested this assumed
influence is already an asset of the management team.
155

Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were organizational
statements, annual employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures, and
performance management templates.
The organizational documents were reviewed for evidence of the influence. Employee
well-being was an implicit value in the organization’s vision, values, and goals. The language in
their core competencies of organizational citizenship and cohesion described “inclusion and
openness” and supporting a “multicultural environment.” The annual goals also included
addressing employee feedback concerns. Employee performance was explicit throughout all
organizational statements. The management team made it clear that their aim was to be a
“premier office” that exuded “professionalism, innovation, and equity” in the mission to “support
the needs of County departments.” They were committed to continuous improvement and
exceeding stakeholder expectations by developing and sustaining a high-performing team. While
well-being and performance were infused into the organizational statements, they did not
reference the usefulness of management virtual burnout mitigation efforts for employee well-
being and performance. Given that the nature of these statements is broad and there was no
mention of the influence, there was not enough evidence in these documents to make a
determination.
The annual employee survey reports offered evidence the management team valued
management virtual burnout mitigation efforts for employee well-being and performance. As
shown in Table 18, the 2021 and 2022 employee survey results were that overall, employees
were satisfied with the organization and their managers. They were also pleased with
management’s efforts to resource them as virtual employees. The qualitative responses also
reflected management support for navigating the work-home interface amid a heavy workload
156

and occasional burnout. One employee wrote, “management is now way more flexible and less
micromanaging as long as we get our jobs done in a timely fashion,” and another commented, “I
love working for purchasing and I love working remotely. It has improved my quality of life
immensely.”

Table 18
Annual Employee Survey Questions Relevant to Managers’ Expectancy-Value
Percentage of staff
agreement/satisfaction
Survey item 2021 2022
How well has the purchasing office done in making it easy for
you to work remotely?
98% 96%
How satisfied are you with the resources and benefits the
office has provided to support you working remotely?
98% 98%
The management team demonstrates support for work-life
balance.
91% 96%
Overall, how satisfied are you with your immediate manager? 98% 96%
How satisfied are you with the purchasing office? 96% 96%

157

The virtual work policies and procedures did not illuminate management’s value of
burnout mitigation efforts. As discussed in previous influences, the outdated policy’s aim was to
ensure the same work level as in-office workers and allow managers and employees to establish
ideal arrangements. The performance management documents did not reference the management
team’s explicit value to mitigate virtual work challenges or reduce burnout. They sought to
measure and enhance performance; however, direct mentions of virtuality-related work
components, engagement, or burnout were absent. The omission of virtual employee burnout in
the policies, procedures, and performance management documents suggested managers did not
value management virtual burnout mitigation efforts for employee well-being and performance.
Considering the four documents, the annual employee surveys were the only source that
suggested this assumed influence was an asset. Two of the other three suggested managers did
not value management virtual burnout mitigation efforts for employee well-being and
performance, and the fourth source was inconclusive. Weighing these sources equally, the
document analysis suggested this was a need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed expectancy-value motivation
influence was not validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources determined this
influence to be an asset.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy theory refers to one’s belief in one’s ability to be successful at a given task.
The assumed self-efficacy motivational influence for ACPO managers is that managers’ level of
self-efficacy for meeting the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout
will impact their success.
158

ACPO Managers Need to Have Confidence They Can Meet Management Preconditions to
Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout
Survey Results. The survey instrument had two questions to assess this assumed self-
efficacy motivation influence. One question evaluated the individual efficacy of each manager,
and the other evaluated each manager’s assessment of the collective efficacy of the management
team. The results found 86% of managers were confident in their individual ability to manage
virtual employees, and all managers were confident in their collective ability as a team to
manage virtual workers. The survey results demonstrated that the management team was
confident they could meet the management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
According to the survey findings, this assumed influence was already an asset. Figures 24 and 25
show the survey results.

Figure 24
Survey Results for Q.16

Note. Survey item: “I am confident in my ability to manage virtual employees.”

159

Figure 25
Survey Results for Q.17

Note. Survey item: “I am confident in my management team’s ability to collectively manage
virtual staff?”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
influence. The question asked managers to discuss their confidence in managing virtual
employees. There was also a probing question to explore their beliefs about their collective
efficacy in managing virtual employees.
The interview responses showed all managers were confident in their ability to manage
virtual workers. Managers shared they were not very confident at first, but over the past 2 and
half years, they have grown in their confidence. I2 shared, “We had to figure it out. It was trial
and error; you can’t use the same paradigm for managing virtual employees that you used in the
office.” I4 commented, “My confidence has grown since 2020, but it wasn’t always there.” I6
said, “I’m better in person, but I’m 95% confident,” and I7 stated, “My confidence level is pretty
high; I actually feel more connected to my team since going virtual.” The responses showed all
160

managers were confident in the management team’s ability to manage virtual workers. I1 and I4
felt more confident in the team than in themselves. I2, I3, I6, and I7 shared that there are
different management styles and some managers have struggled more than others, but overall,
there has been collective growth, and they are confident in the team. The interview findings
suggested this assumed influence was a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were annual
employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures, and performance management
templates. The annual employee surveys did not offer enough evidence to determine the
management team’s confidence to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee
burnout. The Likert-scale questions measured employee sentiment on components of employee
experience, but none were suitable for extracting data on the management team’s confidence to
meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The qualitative questions
on the staff’s general feedback and remote experience also did not offer enough insight into
management confidence to make a need determination.
The virtual work policies and procedures discussed the role of the manager in
establishing ideal telework arrangements in compliance with the policy but did not provide
enough insight into the confidence of managers to meet management preconditions to mitigate
virtual employee burnout. Likewise, the performance management documents did not reference
virtual work, burnout, or engagement and, therefore, did not offer any evidence to determine
manager confidence.
All three documents contained insufficient information to determine managers’
confidence to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. No validity
assertions could be made from the document analysis.
161

Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed self-efficacy motivation
influence was not validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources determined this
assumed influence to be an asset.
Attribution
Attribution theory refers to the relationship between perceived causes of outcomes and
the psychological impacts of those perceptions. The assumed motivational influence of
attribution theory for ACPO managers to achieve their goal is that they make the optimal
attributions for the causes that generate the outcome of meeting management preconditions for
reducing virtual employee burnout.
ACPO Managers Need to Believe They Are Responsible for Meeting the Management
Preconditions They Can Influence
Survey Results. The survey questions corresponding to this assumed influence evaluated
managers’ sentiments on their responsibility for managing their employees’ virtual burnout,
responsibility for coaching them on best practices, and their scope of responsibility. The results
found 72% of managers agreed that they are responsible for managing their direct reports’ virtual
employee burnout, all managers agreed that they are responsible for coaching their employees on
virtual burnout mitigation best practices, and all agreed that there are some aspects of their
employees’ virtual burnout for which they are not responsible. The survey results demonstrated
that managers believed they were responsible for meeting the management preconditions they
can influence; the survey findings suggested this assumed was already an asset. Figures 26–28
show the survey results.

162

Figure 26
Survey Results for Q.18

Note. Survey item: “I am responsible for managing my direct reports’ virtual employee burnout.”

163

Figure 27
Survey Results for Q.19

Note. Survey item: “I am responsible for coaching my direct reports on virtual work best
practices.”

164

Figure 28
Survey Results for Q.20

Note. Survey item: “Even though I am their manager, there are some aspects of my direct
reports’ virtual employee burnout that I am not responsible for.”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
attribution motivation influence. The question asked managers to discuss their belief in their
responsibility to get educated and resourced to manage virtual employee burnout. The interview
responses found all managers believed they were responsible for getting educated and resourced
to manage virtual employee burnout. I5 and I3 stated, “It is 100% my responsibility,” and I1
said, “I can’t count on anyone else to do it for me.” I2 said, “It is incumbent upon leaders to
ensure we’re doing what we can to manage burnout and to manage our people so they do not
burn out.” I4 responded, “People learn by example, and if I’m not at least making an effort to
learn and grow in this area, I’m not setting a good example.” Similarly, I7 commented, “It’s a
culture shift, and we have to learn about it because it’s so different.” I6 took the initiative to find
helpful resources and training because of a belief that managers are responsible for getting
165

educated and resourced on the topic. The interview findings suggested this assumed influence is
already a management team asset.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this assumed influence were
organizational statements, virtual work policies and procedures, and performance management
templates. The organizational statements suggested the management team believed they were
responsible for meeting management preconditions they could influence. The vision, mission,
guiding principles, and core competencies implied the management team was committed to
taking responsibility for educating and resourcing themselves to address any issues impacting the
staff. The annual goals also demonstrated that addressing employee concerns was a key priority
for the management team.
The virtual work policies and procedures did not provide sufficient information to
determine managers’ beliefs about their responsibility to meet management preconditions they
could influence. The policies stated managers’ role in overseeing teleworkers but did not
mention managers’ need to be educated, resourced, and supported on virtual employee burnout
mitigation. The performance management documents did not offer any evidence to determine
managers’ sense of responsibility to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual
employee burnout.
Two documents were inconclusive, and one deemed the managers believed they were
responsible for meeting the management preconditions they could influence. The document
analysis suggested the assumed influence was an asset the management team already possessed.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed attribution motivation
influence was not validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources determined this
influence to be an asset.
166

Organization Influences
The third dimension of analysis was the assumed organizational influences on ACPO
managers’ ability to achieve their stakeholder goal of meeting management preconditions to
reduce virtual employee burnout. Organizational influences on stakeholders refer to
organizational elements, including organizational structure, policies, practices, processes, and
resources. These influences aggregate to form an organizational culture that overtly and covertly
influences ACPO managers. Cultural models refer to shared mental schema and normative
understandings in an organization that are so ubiquitous that they are invisible. Cultural settings,
however, refer to the concrete social contexts where cultural models are enacted and visibly
manifested. The results and findings of the assumed organizational influences are organized by
cultural model and cultural setting influences. Table 19 summarizes the assumed organizational
influences, organizational type, assessment sources, and need/asset determinations. The
remainder of the organization section details the data for each influence and explains the
triangulated validation assertion.

Table 19
Assumed Organizational Influences and Validation Summary
Organizational influence Need or asset
The organization needs to value a comprehensive and unified
management approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout.
Need
Managers need training to mitigate virtual employee burnout. Need
Managers need clear policies and procedures to facilitate their
management of virtual employee burnout.
Need

167

Cultural Models
A cultural model refers to the shared intangible values and beliefs that frame normative
understanding within an organization. The assumed cultural model influence is that the
organization values a comprehensive and unified management approach to managing virtual
employees and mitigating virtual burnout.
The Organization Needs to Value a Comprehensive and Unified Management Approach to
Mitigating Virtual Employee Burnout
Survey Results. The survey instrument had three questions to assess this assumed
cultural model organizational influence. The first question evaluated managers’ sentiment of a
comprehensive and unified management approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout;
although 71% agreed they possessed a comprehensive and unified approach, 14% strongly
disagreed. The second question evaluated managers’ sentiment that each manager dealt with
employees’ virtual burnout in their own way. The survey found 100% agreement on this
question. The third question evaluated managers’ sentiment on the practice of regular managerial
discussions on their performance in helping employees mitigate virtual burnout. The survey
found 71% of managers agreed with the statement that the organization’s managers often have
discussions with one another about how they are doing in helping staff with virtual burnout. The
survey results implied a collective value for a comprehensive and unified approach but also
found that each manager dealt with managing their employees’ virtual burnout in their own way.
The survey results did not provide enough evidence to determine if this influence was an asset or
a need. Figures 29–31 show the survey questions and results.

168

Figure 29
Survey Results for Q.21

Note. Survey item: “My organization currently values a comprehensive and unified management
approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout.”

169

Figure 30
Survey Results for Q.22

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, each manager deals with employees facing virtual
burnout challenges in their own way.”

170

Figure 31
Survey Results for Q.23

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, the managers often discuss with each other how we are
doing with managing virtual staff burnout.”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained two questions for this assumed
cultural model organizational influence. The first question asked managers to discuss the
management team’s collective approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout. The second
question asked managers to share about general conversations with the management team
concerning helping staff with virtual employee burnout. The interview responses to the first
question found 57% of managers believed the management team did not have a collective
approach to managing virtual employee burnout. I2 said, “It’s not at the forefront of our
discussions, but it’s something we discuss from time to time.” I3 responded, “That I know of, we
don’t have a collective approach,” and I4 replied, “I don’t know that I have seen a collective
approach.”
171

I5 commented that there was no collective approach because “It’s not a huge need in our
office. When managers have shared with the group about potential burnout in a person on their
team, we all talk about it, and we sometimes come up with suggestions.” For the managers who
said the team had a collective approach, their responses reflected the management team’s
commitment to general employee well-being. I1 answered, “Because our workload has increased
so much, we discuss it almost every bi-weekly management team meeting; we discuss spreading
out the workload so no one is burned out.” I6 discussed recognition activities and management
communications, and I7 mentioned office-wide engagement activities, including in-person and
virtual gatherings.
The second question about general management team conversations to help staff with
virtual employee burnout elucidated their responses to the first question. I2 responded, “It is not
specifically discussed as employee engagement or burnout, but we talk about how the staff is
doing.” I4 said, “It’s not a subject we talk about; we generally choose employee initiatives from
annual employee survey, and that is our focus.” I3 commented, “Each manager discusses
teambuilding activities they may be doing with their own team." I6 stated, “We discuss
managing workload,” and I7 talked about conversations related to employee recognition. These
responses confirmed the findings in the first question that most managers do not view the
management team as having a collective approach to dealing with virtual employee burnout, but
all managers believe the management team is committed to employee well-being through being
mindful of employee workload, recognition, and team building. The interview findings suggested
this assumed influence was a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this influence were organizational
statements, annual employee survey reports, virtual work policies and procedures, and
172

performance management templates. The organizational statements did not contain enough
specific information to assess an organizational value of a comprehensive and unified
management approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout. The statements implied the
managers were committed to the staff’s performance and well-being but did not explicitly
portray a holistic management approach to dealing with virtual employee burnout.
The annual employee survey reports implied the absence of a comprehensive and unified
management approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout. There were no Likert-scale
questions to address virtual burnout, but several employees mentioned burnout in the general
feedback and remote work experience open-text responses. One employee commented, “work-
life balance is important to be productive and to maintain a healthy positive mindset. I hope
management is encouraging that more often.” Another team member said, “I believe the team of
managers are close to burn out and the office is not that far behind.” An assumed manager
asserted that a major concern was “overextending my staff.” These responses suggested this
influence was valid.
The virtual work policies and procedures outlined an office-wide approach to teleworking
but did not discuss mitigating virtual burnout. The policy allowed individual managers to deal
with each of their virtual workers differently without reference to virtual burnout mitigation
policies and procedures for all managers. The virtual work policies and procedures suggested this
is a need. Likewise, the performance management templates depicted a comprehensive and
unified management approach to general employee performance, but they contained no mention
of virtuality, engagement, or burnout. If there were a collective approach to managing virtual
employee burnout, it would likely be reflected in the performance management documents. This
173

implied each manager dealt with virtual employee burnout in their own way, not in a unified
manner.
The documents consisted of one inconclusive source and three sources suggesting there
was not a comprehensive and unified management approach to mitigating virtual employee
burnout. The document analysis suggested this was a need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed cultural model organizational
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirmed this is a
need.
Cultural Settings
Cultural settings refer to the concrete social contexts where cultural models are enacted
and tangibly realized. The two assumed cultural setting influences were management training
and the provision of clear policies and procedures to facilitate managing virtual employees.
Managers Need Training to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout
Survey Results. The survey instrument had three questions to assess this assumed
cultural setting organizational influence. The first question evaluated managers’ sentiment on
receiving training on burnout syndrome’s causes and outcomes. The result found 57% of
managers disagreed they received training on burnout causes and outcomes. The second question
assessed managers’ sentiment on receiving training on virtual employee burnout mitigation best
practices. The result showed 57% of managers agreed they received best-practice training. The
third question evaluated managers’ sentiments on receiving training on how to use technology to
mitigate virtual employee burnout. Fifty-seven percent of them agreed they received training on
leveraging technology to mitigate virtual burnout. In sum, analysis of the three survey questions
suggests this a need. Figures 32–34 illustrate the survey results.
174

Figure 32
Survey Results for Q.24

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, managers receive training on the causes and outcomes
of burnout syndrome.”

175

Figure 33
Survey Results for Q.25:

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, managers receive training on best practices to mitigate
virtual employee burnout.”

176

Figure 34
Survey Results for Q.26

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, managers receive training on how to use technology to
mitigate virtual employee burnout.”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained one question for this assumed
organizational influence. The question asked managers to share about any training they received
from the organization on managing their employees’ virtual burnout. The question was followed
by a probe exploring training for personal virtual burnout.
The interview responses found no managers received comprehensive training on
managing virtual employee burnout for employees or themselves. While there was no
comprehensive training specific to virtual employee burnout, 86% of the managers described
training offerings that touched on virtual work and/or burnout. Five managers referred to a
mandatory 5-hour asynchronous course on work-life balance offered through their parent
organization’s subscription to a massive online course (MOOC) provider. I7 also shared about a
course on time management offered through the same provider. Additionally, I7 was the only
177

one to discuss a course on cybersecurity offered through their parent organization’s learning
management system that contained some content about telework. I1 spoke about a virtual
workshop in which remote work habits came up. Not all managers recalled this training or
understood them to be about virtual employee burnout. I4 responded that there had not been any
training, and I3 said, “The stuff I have attended has all been third-party.” The interview findings
suggested this is a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this assumed influence were
annual employee survey reports and performance management templates. The annual employee
survey reports suggested managers needed training on virtual employee burnout mitigation. The
open-text comments outlined in the previous influence revealed that burnout is an issue
employees and managers face. Additional responses included staff expressing the concern of
“getting burned out since everyone has been working beyond 40 hours for the past 2 years” and
“burning out because of the inability to take breaks between big projects.” Other employees
stated concerns about “social isolation” and “the loss of camaraderie amongst colleagues.” These
responses suggested the management team needs training to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
The performance management templates did not contain enough evidence to determine if
managers needed training on virtual burnout mitigation.
One document source for this assumed influence validated the influence, and the other
was inconclusive. The document analysis for this assumed influence suggested this was a
management team need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed cultural setting organizational
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirmed this is a
need.
178

Managers Need Clear Policies and Procedures to Facilitate Their Management of Virtual
Employee Burnout
Survey Results. The survey instrument had four questions to assess this assumed cultural
setting organizational influence. The first question evaluated managers’ sentiment on the
organization having clear and sufficient policies and procedures for managing virtual workers.
The results found 85% of managers agreed the organization had clear and sufficient policies and
procedures in place. The second question assessed managers’ sentiment on employees’ virtual
work behaviors being incorporated into the organization’s formal performance management
process. The result showed 57% of them believed employees’ virtual work behaviors had been
incorporated into the performance management process. The third question evaluated their
sentiment on being regularly evaluated and coached on how they manage virtual employees and
found 57% of respondents agreed that managers are evaluated and coached on their virtual
employee management. The fourth question assessed managers’ sentiment on the organization’s
provision of equity-based policies that acknowledge differences in virtual workers’ at-home
demands; the result revealed 57% of managers agreed these policies were enacted. The survey
results suggested this was a management team need. Figures 35–38 show the survey results.

179

Figure 35
Survey Results for Q.27

Note. Survey item: “My organization has clear and sufficient policies and procedures for
managing virtual workers.”

180

Figure 36
Survey Results for Q.28

Note. Survey item: “My organization has incorporated employees’ virtual work behaviors into its
formal performance management process.”

181

Figure 37
Survey Results for Q.29

Note. Survey item: “In my organization, managers are regularly evaluated and coached on how
they manage virtual employees.”

182

Figure 38
Survey Results for Q.30

Note. Survey item: “My organization has equity-based policies that acknowledge differences in
work-from-home demands amongst our virtual staff (parents, caregivers, staff with disabilities,
etc.).”

Interview Findings. The interview protocol contained four questions for this assumed
cultural setting organizational influence. The first question asked managers to share about their
organization’s policies and procedures for managing virtual workers. The second question asked
how the organization incorporated employees’ virtual work behaviors into their performance
management process. The third question inquired how managers are evaluated and coached on
managing virtual employee burnout, and the fourth asked managers to discuss their
organization’s equity-based policies for employees’ various at-home needs. The four questions
were equally weighted to determine need validation.
183

The interview responses to the first question found no managers surmised the
organization had up-to-date written policies and procedures for managing virtual workers. Six of
the seven managers acknowledged a telework policy incorporated into the employee manual but
also admitted the policy had not been updated since the office went fully remote. I2 replied, “I
think the only policy and procedure would be our teleworking procedure; I don’t know that we
have other policies in place.” A few managers were unsure about the content of the previous
policy. I4 responded, “We have an employee manual, and there is something in there about
virtual work, but I haven’t read it in a while.” I3 commented, “I know we had something before;
I think it allowed people to work from home twice a month,” and I5 replied, “I think people
could work from home once a week, but they had to sign an agreement.” Acknowledging that the
policy needed to be updated, I7 also stated, “as far as conduct for working virtually, there would
be no difference in expectations for virtual or on-site employees.” Discussing the pivot to a fully
remote office, I6, the only manager who did not mention the previous policy, said, “everything
happened so fast we had to figure it out as we went; I don’t think we have anything specifically
written.” The responses to the first question suggested this influence was a need.
The interview responses to the second question found no managers deduced that virtual
work behaviors had been incorporated into the formal performance management process. All the
managers spoke about the organizations’ performance management mechanisms, including
formal trimester check-ins and an annual review, but there was nothing explicit about virtual
work behaviors in the performance management process. I7 shared, “Employees are evaluated on
core competencies attached to our guiding principles; virtual work items may come up, but there
isn’t a separate section that just deals with remote work.” I2 responded, “I don’t think that we
really incorporated it aside from, you know, ensuring that staff understands that they’re being
184

held to the same standards,” and I3 said, “our check-ins would provide opportunities to discuss
anything that a manager might be suspecting, but I don’t know that we have something directly
about being remote.” I4 commented, “There’s no box to check for that,” and I1 stated, “I ask
team members how they are doing working virtually and if they need anything from me, but
virtual work isn’t like a section of the review or anything.” The interview responses to this
question also suggested this influence was a need.
The interview responses for the third question found no managers were specifically
evaluated and coached on managing virtual employees. The general sentiment was that their
main evaluation criteria were their teams’ success. If their people were doing well in a virtual
environment and there were no overarching complaints, then there was no need for remote-
specific evaluation and coaching. Concurrently, most managers shared about informal support
and encouragement they received from other managers as they adjusted to managing virtual
employees. I7 answered, “I’m not evaluated on that,” and I3 said, “I don’t think that type of
evaluation and coaching is happening.” I1 responded, “There isn’t anything formal, but I rely on
my fellow managers to coach me,” echoing I2’s reply that “we all kind of look to each other.” I4
said, “we haven’t really gotten that type of coaching, I feel like we’re trusted first, and until you
show me you can’t be, I’m going to trust you.” I5 asserted, “It really hasn’t been an issue, so I
want to say it’s sort of not that applicable.” The interview findings from this question suggested
this influence was a need.
The interview responses to the fourth question found no managers surmised the
organization possessed stated equity-based policies to acknowledge differences in employees’
work-from-home demands. Despite not having updated written policies, the managers reflected
on the office’s commitment to equity in their guiding principles and expressed that each manager
185

works with their team members to ensure they have work-home balance. I4 replied, “There is no
written policy; as long as the work gets done, the managers allow people to do what they have to
do.” I5 said, “I do not think there are policies per se, but we have high principles which govern
our office, and one of those is equity.” Similarly, I7 shared, “We don’t have a formal policy, but
we discuss employee needs as a management team and handle things case by case.”
Some managers referred to the current written policy, which pre-dated the fully remote
office and was relatively strict. I2 responded, “to be honest, the flexibility managers give is the
opposite of what’s written in our existing telework policy,” and I6 said, “What’s written is
different than what happens.” I1 shared specific accommodations: “We have made
accommodations for new parents; we’ve made accommodations for elderly parents. We’ve made
accommodations for people who are moving. It’s not policy, but it’s what we do.” While
managers make personal accommodations and have an espoused equity culture, they confirmed
they do not have up-to-date policies that address the different at-home demands of employees.
The interview findings from this question suggested this influence was a need.
The four questions for this assumed cultural setting organizational influence found the
management team does not have clear policies and procedures to facilitate their management of
virtual employee burnout. The interview findings suggested this influence was a need.
Document Analysis. Documents analyzed to evaluate this assumed influence were
organizational statements, virtual work policies and procedures, and performance management
templates. The organizational statements had no reference to virtual employee burnout. While it
is understandable that virtuality is not mentioned in the vision, mission, and guiding principles,
addressing virtuality, engagement, and burnout were not referenced in organizational goals
either. Considering recent employee feedback and the wide-scale transition to a virtual office, the
186

organizational goals should have addressed concerns related to virtuality, engagement, and
burnout. The organizational statements suggested this influence was a need.
The virtual work policies and procedures were outdated and did not reflect the present
reality of a fully remote workforce. They were written to reflect teleworking as an exception for
employees who considered working from home at a maximum of 1 day per week. Managers
were unable to leverage these policies and procedures in their current context. The existing
virtual work policies and procedures suggested this influence was a need. The performance
management documents did not reference virtual work policies or procedures managers could
use to manage virtual employees. Apart from ratings on core competencies, they did not
reference policy. They were written generically to foster discussion between managers and team
members. They did not contain enough evidence to determine if managers needed clear policies
and procedures to facilitate their management of virtual employee burnout.
Two of the document sources to evaluate this assumed influence suggested the influence
was valid, and one source was inconclusive. The aggregate document analysis for this assumed
influence suggested it was a need.
Summary. The aggregate data analysis found this assumed cultural setting organizational
influence to be validated. The weighted analysis of the triangulated sources affirmed this is a
need.
Summary of Influences
Tables 20–22 show this study’s KMO influences and their determination as assets or
needs.

187

Table 20
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Knowledge influence Knowledge type Asset or need
ACPO managers need to understand the
relationships between virtual work, engagement,
and burnout.
Conceptual Asset
ACPO managers need to know how to build trust
with virtual team members.
Procedural Need
ACPO managers need to know how to coach their
virtual team members to excel in a virtual context.
Procedural Need
ACPO managers need to configure personal virtual
employee burnout mitigation best practices that
best help them to mitigate their own virtual
employee burnout.
Metacognitive Need
ACPO managers need to configure best-practice
virtual employee burnout mitigation
organizational strategies that align with their
organization.
Metacognitive Need

Table 21
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Motivation influence Motivation type Asset or need
ACPO managers need to value the usefulness of
management virtual employee burnout
mitigation efforts for employee well-being and
performance.
Expectancy-value
theory (utility value)
Asset
ACPO managers need to have confidence they
can meet management preconditions to
mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Self-efficacy theory Asset
ACPO managers need to believe they are
responsible for meeting the management
preconditions they can influence.
attribution theory Asset
188

Table 22
Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Organizational influence Organizational type Asset/need
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified management
approach to mitigating virtual employee
burnout.
Cultural model Need
Managers need training to mitigate virtual
employee burnout.
Cultural setting Need
Managers need clear policies and procedures
to facilitate their management of virtual
employee burnout.
Cultural setting Need

The data analysis and findings of the 11 assumed KMO influences determined needs and
assets for the management team to achieve their stakeholder goal. These needs and assets
informed the design of solutions that targeted validated need gaps and leveraged verified assets.
Chapter Five details the proposed solutions for addressing the needs, leveraging the assets, and,
ultimately, closing the gap. Chapter Five also provides recommendations for implementing and
evaluating the proposed solutions.

189

Chapter Five: Recommended Solutions and Integrated Plan
Adams County (a pseudonym) is one of the nation's fastest-growing counties, with
approximately 1.5 million residents. Several thousand residents of neighboring counties
commute and work in this county each day. The ACPO ensures Adams County’s ongoing
operations via procurement, contract compliance, and fixed asset management. All county
departments rely on this office to provide goods and services. The ACPO’s mission is to help
improve taxpayers’ quality of life by supporting county departments’ needs. As ACPO supports
the departments, the departments serve county residents by providing needed government
infrastructure and civil services. The ACPO consistently wins annual industry awards for
excellence in public sector procurement.
Organizational Performance Goal
The organizational performance goal is that, by December 2024, all ACPO employees
will participate in an office-wide campaign to mitigate virtual employee burnout. Mitigating
virtual employee burnout is critical to fulfilling ACPO’s mission. The ACPO management team
and an external consultant developed this goal. The novelty and nature of virtual employee
burnout inform the benchmarking of the goal. While virtual employee burnout is a new and
growing phenomenon, there should be no acceptable burnout rate at any organization. Virtual
employees' expanding demands and schedules must be accompanied by tools and resources to
mitigate burnout. The risk of burnout cannot be eliminated, but it can be mitigated through an
office-wide campaign that educates employees about virtual burnout and equips them with best
practices to combat it. Further, employees need assurance that their managers are committed to
cultivating an organizational culture that mitigates virtual employee burnout. An office-wide
campaign with 100% employee participation is a strong step toward addressing the problem. A
190

participation goal of less than that would compromise the campaign and produce suboptimal
results. With full participation, all staff will be educated on virtual employee burnout and invited
into frank discussions about their challenges and opportunities. A collective framing of the
problem and mitigation best practices will foster a unified approach. Managers will monitor their
direct reports’ participation to ensure there is 100% participation by the target date.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Three ACPO stakeholder groups previously discussed are the PA, management team, and
non-management staff. The PA is the ACPO’s leader and has full authority to address
organizational problems. The management team consists of seven directors and managers,
including the PA. The non-management staff consists of approximately 40 members in five
functional teams, although they often collaborate with other functional team members. Non-
management staff members fulfill management demands as they manage their work and life
from home.
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
The stakeholders of focus for this study were the ACPO management team members, as
they have the most power to facilitate sustainable change via the office-wide campaign. There
was a high risk of a failed campaign if the management team did not accomplish this goal before
the non-management staff members engaged in the office-wide campaign. Table 1 outlines the
ACPO mission, organizational performance goal, and aligned stakeholder performance goal.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this innovation study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for ACPO managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal. The analysis commenced by generating a list of possible
191

influences for ACPO managers to accomplish their goal and then systematically examined the
influences to ascertain which were needs and which were assets. While a complete needs
analysis would have focused on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder of focus
in this analysis was the ACPO management team. The research questions that guided this needs
analysis study were
1. What are the ACPO management team’s knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs related to meeting the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions?
Introduction and Overview
Chapter Four responded to the first research question by outlining the case study’s
findings on managers’ needs and assets to meet the management preconditions for reducing
virtual employee burnout. This section of Chapter Five will address the second research question
concerning recommended KMO solutions. First, the recommended KMO solutions are justified
and detailed, and second, the recommended solutions are incorporated into an integrated
implementation and evaluation plan to increase the likelihood of intervention success.
The recommended solutions target the data-validated root needs and assets. From the 11
assumed influences, the data analysis yielded seven needs and four assets. The recommendations
address the knowledge and organizational needs that are critical to managers achieving their
goal. Additionally, the recommendations include strengthening a motivation asset to bolster
perseverance as the intervention proceeds. The recommended solutions are rooted in principles
192

from learning, motivation, management, and organizational leadership theories. They are further
justified with empirical research.
To deploy the recommended solutions systematically, the new world Kirkpatrick model
(NWKM) is leveraged for integrated implementation and evaluation. Designed to evaluate
training initiatives, the NWKM can also be used to structure and assess change interventions. It
consists of four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Starting with Level 4, the
intervention design begins with outlining desired outcomes and then progresses to detailing
critical behaviors to achieve the desired outcomes. Following the progression, the design
considers a learning program to equip participants with the necessary knowledge, skills, and
motivation. Lastly, to ensure learners are engaged, participant reactions are considered and
evaluated.
To increase the likelihood of intervention success, the recommended KMO solutions are
incorporated into a program framed by the NWKM. The learning component of the program
(Level 2) will equip ACPO managers to implement the solutions through strategic training and
evaluation. The learning program entitled Virtual Management Training (VMT) is a 10-week
program consisting of asynchronous and synchronous modules and sessions. Engaged
matriculation through the learning program will equip managers to perform the critical behaviors
and achieve the desired results. All engagement and learning levels will be evaluated
immediately after the VMT and at delayed intervals after the training. Likewise, key outcome
indicators and critical behaviors will be monitored and evaluated through relevant metrics at
appropriate times. The ACPO director of operations will provide organizational support by
overseeing the implementation and evaluation plan. The progress data on all levels of the plan
will be reported and accessed on a dynamic digital dashboard. The dashboard will consolidate
193

and present quantitative metrics in charts and tables and display qualitative data in the form of
comments and profiles.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
The recommended solutions target the data-validated KMO root needs and assets
determined through the organizational case study. The solutions are rooted in theoretical
principles and justified with empirical research.
Knowledge Recommendations
The assumed knowledge influences managers need to meet their stakeholder goal were
framed by three of the four Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) knowledge types: conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. The data revealed the conceptual knowledge influence to be an
asset; however, the study found the procedural and metacognitive knowledge influences to be
needs. Clark and Estes (2008) outline four types of knowledge and skill enhancement on an
escalating scale – information, job aids, training, and education. Information consists of solely
giving relevant input; job aids are resources that can be used on the job to perform a task;
training consists of procedural knowledge, demonstrations, and feedback; and education includes
theoretical and strategic knowledge for novel problem solving. Each progressive enhancement
type is inclusive of the preceding type(s). The recommended solutions for the procedural
knowledge needs are framed by Clark and Estes’ (2008) description of training, and the
recommended solutions for the metacognitive knowledge needs are framed by their description
of education.
The two knowledge needs were (a) the need to know how to build trust with virtual team
members and (b) the need to know how to coach virtual team members to excel in a virtual
context. Both needs were prioritized in framing recommendations, as they were both integral to
194

managers’ ability to mitigate virtual employee burnout throughout the organization. The
recommendations for the procedural knowledge needs involved training on literature-based best
practices to build trust and coach staff most effectively. The training will include job aids,
demonstrations, guided practice, and feedback. The two metacognitive knowledge needs were (a)
the need to configure personal virtual employee burnout best practices and (b) the need to
configure best-practice organizational strategies to mitigate office-wide virtual employee
burnout. Both needs were prioritized in the recommendations as managers’ effectiveness will
hinge on their ability to learn literature-based best practices, assess themselves and their context,
self-regulate, and strategize based on best-practice criteria. The recommendations to address the
metacognitive knowledge needs involved education through resources and opportunities for
managers to learn and reflect on literature-supported content on virtual work and burnout.
Metacognitive modeling exercises will also be provided for managers to configure personal and
organizational strategies for mitigating virtual burnout. The assumed knowledge influences,
need/asset determinations, priorities, and recommendations rooted in theoretical principles are
outlined in Table 23.

195

Table 23
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Knowledge influence Asset
or
need
Priority
(yes or no)
Principle

Context-specific
recommendation
Conceptual: ACPO
managers need to
understand the
relationships
between virtual
work, engagement,
and burnout.
Asset No
Procedural: ACPO
managers need to
know how to build
trust with virtual
team members.
Need Yes To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (McCrudden
& Schraw, 2007).

Acquiring skills for
expertise frequently
begins with learning
declarative
knowledge about
individual procedural
steps (Clark et al.,
2010).

Managers can activate
team members’
release of the trust-
enhancing brain
chemical oxytocin
through a set of
management
behaviors (Zak, 2017)
Training: provide
training inclusive
of new
information, job
aids,
demonstrations,
guided practice,
and feedback on
the eight behaviors
to build trust most
effectively with
team members.

Procedural: ACPO
managers need to
Need Yes Learning tasks that are
similar to those that
Socialized training:
provide
196

Knowledge influence Asset
or
need
Priority
(yes or no)
Principle

Context-specific
recommendation
know how to coach
their virtual team
members to excel in
a virtual context.
are common to the
individual’s familiar
cultural settings will
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).

Cognition is mediated
social contexts
(Searle, 2017).

Employees excel more
with feedback that
focuses on their
strengths rather than
their weaknesses
(Buckingham &
Goodall, 2019)

opportunities for
managers to be
trained together on
best-practice
coaching
behaviors; and
share challenges,
progress, and
promising
practices with one
another.

Metacognitive: ACPO
managers need to
configure personal
virtual employee
burnout mitigation
best practices that
best help them to
mitigate their own
virtual employee
burnout.
Need Yes Metacognition
increases self-
regulation (APA,
2015)

Metacognitive analysis
enables exploration
and application of
pre-existing and
novel knowledge
(Rueda, 2011)

Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders are
knowledgeable about
and are consistently
learning about
themselves (Mezirow,
2000; Waters et al.,
2003).
Education: Provide
opportunities for
managers to learn
and reflect on
literature-
supported content
on virtual work
benefits and
challenges,
employee
engagement and
burnout.

Provide guided
metacognitive
modeling exercises
for managers to
configure and
reconfigure
personal virtual
employee burnout
mitigation
197

Knowledge influence Asset
or
need
Priority
(yes or no)
Principle

Context-specific
recommendation

strategies based on
educational
resources.
Metacognitive: ACPO
managers need to
configure best-
practice virtual
employee burnout
mitigation
organizational
strategies that align
with their
organization.
Need Yes Metacognitive analysis
facilitates problem
solving and progress
based on a set of
criteria (Mayer, 2011)

The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2006)

Education: Provide
opportunities for
managers to learn
and reflect on
literature-
supported virtual
employee burnout
mitigation
organizational
strategies.

Provide guided
metacognitive
scaffolding
exercises for
managers to
configure and
reconfigure virtual
burnout
organizational
strategies based on
educational
resources.

Increasing Managers ’ Procedural Knowledge on How to Build Trust Most Effectively With
Employees
The data found that while managers placed a high value on trust, they did not know the
best-practice combination of management behaviors to build trust most effectively with their
team members. The recommended solution for closing this knowledge gap is rooted in
198

information processing system theory. Clark et al. (2010) asserted that acquiring skills for
expertise frequently begins with learning declarative knowledge about individual procedural
steps. Therefore, ACPO managers need to learn the components of neuroscience-based best
practices for building trust and then practice integrating them. The recommendation is to provide
training inclusive of new information, job aids, demonstrations, guided practice, and feedback on
the eight behaviors to build trust most effectively with team members.
McCrudden and Schraw (2007) validated that to develop mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply what they have
learned. To enact procedural knowledge, learners generally already possess factual and
conceptual knowledge in their specific domain (Saks et al., 2021). The ACPO managers need to
learn about the neuroscience-based best practices for building trust, and they need to be trained
on practical actions to implement these practices (Zak, 2017). Lippert and Dulewicz (2018)
validated trustworthiness as the predominant construct of team effectiveness in a study involving
108 virtual teams. In another study using a grounded theory approach to investigate virtual
leadership behaviors, Turesky et al. (2020) asserted that trust-building training for virtual team
leaders resulted in better performance outcomes. Further, in a meta-analysis to organize and
present successful organizational strategies for helping virtual managers, Ford et al. (2017) found
training on trust-building behaviors to be instrumental to success. These studies support the
recommendation to provide training on procedural knowledge on how to build trust most
effectively with employees.

199

Increasing Managers ’ Procedural Knowledge on How to Coach Their Employees Most
Effectively
The data found that managers relied heavily on anecdotal best practices for coaching
employees and did not have sufficient knowledge of the literature-based best practices for giving
employees feedback. The recommended solution for closing this knowledge gap is rooted in
sociocultural theory. Learning tasks that are similar to those that are common to the individual’s
familiar cultural settings will promote learning and transfer (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
This statement suggests that managers are already familiar with coaching team members and
would benefit from a socialized learning approach to learning literature-based coaching best
practices. These best practices are built on the research-tested premise that employees excel more
with feedback focused on their strengths rather than their weaknesses (Buckingham & Goodall,
2019). The recommendation is to provide opportunities for managers to be trained together on
strengths-focused coaching behaviors; the social format will facilitate a context to share
challenges, progress, and promising practices with one another.
Sociocultural theory postulates that cognition is mediated by social contexts (Searle,
2017). The synchronous training sessions between managers will facilitate effective instructional
methods, including observational learning, credible modeling, questioning, feedback, self-
regulation, and cooperative learning (Rueda, 2011; Schunk & Usher, 2019). Social learning
approaches, such as communities of practice, allow participants to learn relevant knowledge and
about their colleagues’ expertise and experience (Wenger et al., 2002). As managers learn,
unlearn, relearn, and think together, a collective understanding is redeveloped (Pyrko et al.,
2017). In a study examining the efficacy of communities of practice through Bayesian change
point detection, Cordery et al. (2015) investigated the impact of communities of practice in a
200

multinational company over 5 years and found evidence to support their prediction that
communities of practice improved operational routines. These findings suggest that ACPO
managers’ socialized training on procedural knowledge for strengths-focused coaching would
improve the feedback they give their team members.
Increasing Managers ’ Metacognitive Knowledge on Personal Virtual Employee Burnout
Mitigation Best Practices
The data demonstrated that managers did not reflect on virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices and configure them to their needs. The recommended solution to
address this gap is rooted in learning theory. Metacognitive analysis increases self-regulation and
enables exploration and application of pre-existing and novel knowledge (APA, 2015; Rueda,
2011). Thus, managers need to reflect on their virtual employee burnout mitigation efforts in
relation to literature-based best practices. The recommended solution is to educate managers on
resources and opportunities to learn and reflect on literature-supported personal virtual employee
burnout mitigation best practices.
For situations where challenges require novel problem solving, Clark and Estes (2008)
recommended education for knowledge enhancement. The evolving nature of this metacognitive
knowledge need aligns with the need for education. There will be novel and unexpected
challenges as managers continuously attempt to mitigate their own virtual burnout. The primary
strategy for educating managers will be modeling. Through modeling, an instructor would walk
the managers through the metacognitive phases, talk through how they research and synthesize
literature-based best practices, assess their strengths and weaknesses, create a plan of action,
evaluate progress, and modify their approach (Ambrose et al., 2010). Managers will then be
given opportunities to engage in the metacognitive process phases with the instructor and receive
201

feedback. Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders are knowledgeable about and are
consistently learning about themselves (Mezirow, 2000; Waters et al., 2003). These studies
support the recommendation to educate managers on metacognitive knowledge and skills to
reflect on and configure best practices to mitigate personal virtual employee burnout.
Increasing Managers ’ Metacognitive Knowledge on Organizational Strategies to Mitigate
Virtual Employee Burnout
The data found that managers did not reflect on literature-based best-practice
organizational strategies to mitigate virtual employee burnout, nor did they attempt to configure
an aligned set of strategies. The recommended solution is rooted in learning theory. Mayer
(2011) declared that metacognitive analysis facilitates problem solving and progress based on
criteria, suggesting that organizations benefit when their leaders engage in metacognitive
analysis of organizational problems. The recommended solution is to provide managers with
education on resources and opportunities to learn and reflect on literature-supported
organizational best-practice strategies to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
The use of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning (Baker, 2006). In the current
social and economic context of volatility and uncertainty, organizational leaders must facilitate
continuous synchronization with their ambiguous landscapes by making and remaking meaning
through metacognition (Castillo & Trinh, 2019). Leaders who proficiently reflect upon,
configure, and reconfigure strategies to meet organizational demands demonstrate the adaptive
leadership needed in complex times (Northouse, 2019). Through education, an instructor would
scaffold managers in their metacognitive processes related to best-practice organizational
strategies for mitigating virtual employee burnout. Scaffolding refers to the process by which
instructors begin the learning process with cognitive supports and gradually take them away as
202

learners develop mastery (Ambrose et al., 2010). The instructor would lead the managers through
metacognitive exercises on isolated components of virtual burnout organizational strategy and
later move on to the more complex task of integrating the components. The instruction would
also gradually enable more learner independence. There is ample support in the literature to
suggest that strengthening managers’ metacognitive abilities would result in improved
configurations of organizational strategies to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Motivation Recommendations
Expectancy-value theory, self-efficacy theory, and attribution theory framed the three
assumed motivation influences on managers to meet their stakeholder goals. The data found all
three assumed influences to be assets the management team already possessed. Managers
believed their efforts to mitigate virtual employee burnout were useful for employee well-being
and performance (expectancy-value). They were confident they could meet management
preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout (self-efficacy). Thirdly, they believed they
were responsible for meeting the preconditions they could influence (attribution). Although an
asset, the attributional construct will be prioritized in the recommended solutions.
Managers must continue to prioritize their attributional motivational as programming to
meet their stakeholder and organizational goal becomes more concrete (Rueda, 2011). With no
formal initiatives to address the problem, they currently feel a generic sense of responsibility to
be educated and resourced to mitigate their employees’ virtual burnout. Once strategic
interventions begin with implicit demands on time and resources, they must continue to uphold
an unwavering sense of responsibility. The recommended solution to uphold attributional
motivation involves holding managers accountable through monitoring progress and providing
structured feedback. The recommendation also strengthens managers’ expectancy-value and self-
203

efficacy motivational constructs. The assumed motivation influences, need/asset determinations,
priorities, and recommendations rooted in theoretical principles are outlined in Table 24.

204

Table 24
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Motivation
influence
Asset or
need
Priority
(yes or
no)
Principle Context-Specific
Recommendation
ACPO managers need to
value the usefulness of
management virtual
employee burnout
mitigation efforts for
employee well-being
and performance.
Asset No
ACPO managers need to
have confidence they
can meet management
preconditions to
mitigate virtual
employee burnout.
Asset No
ACPO managers need to
believe they are
responsible for
meeting the
management
preconditions they can
influence.
Asset Yes Motivation is likely to
be enhanced when
actors attribute internal
locus (effort instead of
ability), deem the
outcome controllable
through their
interventions, and see
the situation as
impermanent and
subject to change
through their
involvement (Schunk
et al., 2014).

The underlying structure
of attributions impacts
one’s self-esteem and
belief that they can
positively impact
desired outcomes
(Hareli, 2018).

Provide
monitoring and
structured
feedback on
their
performance.
205

Uphold Attributive Responsibility Through Accountability
The data demonstrated that managers believed they were responsible for mitigating
employees’ virtual burnout. This assumed influence was deemed an asset in the findings. The
recommended solution is rooted in attribution theory. Schunk et al. (2014) assert that motivation
is likely to be enhanced when actors attribute internal locus (effort instead of ability), deem the
outcome controllable through their interventions, and see the situation as impermanent and
subject to change through their involvement (Schunk et al., 2014). Thus, as interventional
programming ensues, managers need to attribute the success or failure of the office to mitigate
virtual employee burnout to their level of involvement and effort. The recommended solution is
to uphold managers’ attributive responsibility by providing accountability through monitoring
progress and giving structured feedback.
The underlying structure of attributions impacts one’s self-esteem and belief that they can
positively impact desired outcomes (Hareli, 2018). To investigate attributions in organizational
contexts, Harvey et al. (2014) conducted a meta-analysis and found reliable evidence that
attributions are a critical component of individuals’ cognitive processes related to key
organizational outcomes. To maintain a high level of attribution, feedback to managers must
stress the importance of effort and self-determination (Pintrich, 2003). The importance and
effectiveness of feedback also coincide with the two other motivational need constructs outlined
in Table 24. Consistent with expectancy-value theory, timely and appropriate feedback, along
with accompanying success, positively impacts perceptions of competence (Borgogni et al.,
2011). Simultaneously, goal-directed practice coupled with frequent, accurate, credible, and
targeted feedback on progress increases self-efficacy (Zimmerman et al., 2017). The literature on
motivation supports the recommended solution to provide accountability to managers through
206

monitoring progress and providing feedback as managers embark on achieving their stakeholder
and organizational goals.
Organization Recommendations
The assumed organizational influences were framed by Gallimore and Goldenberg’s
(2001) notion of cultural models and settings. Cultural models refer to the intangible beliefs,
values, and shared mental schema within an organization; cultural settings are the concrete social
contexts where cultural models are enacted and visibly manifested. The study consisted of one
assumed cultural model influence and two assumed cultural setting influences. The data
validated all three influences as organizational needs. Each organizational need was deemed a
priority as the three needs supported one another and could feasibly be resolved together.
The cultural model need was that the organization needed to value a comprehensive and
unified management approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout. The recommended
solution involves management team workshops to discuss and craft an official approach and then
publish a management memorandum on office-wide portals and platforms for all employees to
read and reference. The first cultural setting need was the need for management training on
virtual employee burnout mitigation. The recommended solution is to provide synchronous and
asynchronous training on virtual employee burnout mitigation best practices. The second cultural
setting need was clear policies and procedures for virtual work arrangements. The recommended
solution is to draft and institute virtual employee burnout mitigation policies and procedures,
inclusive of equity-based accommodations. The assumed organizational influences, need or asset
determinations, priorities, and recommendations rooted in theoretical principles are outlined in
Table 25.
207

Table 25
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Organizational
influence
Asset
or
need
Priority
(yes or no)
Principle Context-specific
recommendation
The organization
needs to value a
comprehensive and
unified
management
approach to
mitigating virtual
employee burnout.
Need Yes A unified management
approach to
overcoming
organizational
challenges is a key
element of strategic
leadership and
organizational change
management (Kotter,
2012; Lewis, 2011).

Organizational culture is
an organization’s
accumulated learning
that forms a pattern of
unconscious beliefs,
values, and behaviors,
and can be analyzed
through consideration
of observable artifacts,
espoused beliefs and
values, and
unconscious
assumptions (Schein &
Schein, 2017).
Conduct management
team workshops to
discuss and craft
management’s
official approach to
mitigating virtual
employee burnout.

Publish management
memorandum on
management’s
philosophy and
commitment to
mitigating virtual
employee burnout
on office-wide
portals and
platforms.
Managers need
training to mitigate
virtual employee
burnout.

Need Yes Training is one of the
key resources an
organization can
provide to bolster
engagement and
performance as it
facilitates the
necessary knowledge,
skills, and motivation
(Aguinis & Kraiger,
2009; Grossman &
Salas, 2011;
Provide synchronous
and asynchronous
training to
managers on virtual
employee burnout
mitigation best
practices.
208

Organizational
influence
Asset
or
need
Priority
(yes or no)
Principle Context-specific
recommendation
Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016).

Organizations that
ensure their staff
(including managers)
resource needs are met
are more likely to
realize better outcomes
(Odden & Picus, 2011;
Waters et al., 2003).
Managers need clear
policies and
procedures to
facilitate their
management of
virtual employee
burnout.
Need Yes Change is most
effectively catalyzed
and sustained by
altering everyday
policies, practices,
procedures, and
routines, thereby
impacting the beliefs
and values that guide
employee actions
(Schneider et al.,
1996).
Rules, policies,
standards, and
standard operating
procedures limit
individual discretion
and help ensure that
behavior is predictable
and consistent
(Bolman & Deal,
2017).
Effective leaders
address institutional
policies and practices
that create barriers to
equity (Bensimon,
2005).
Draft and institute
virtual employee
burnout mitigation
policies and
procedures,
inclusive of equity-
based
accommodations

209

Establish Official Management Team Approach
The study found that the management team did not have a comprehensive and unified
approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout; each manger approached the problem in their
own way. The recommended solution is rooted in organizational change management theory. A
unified management approach to overcoming organizational challenges is a key element of
strategic leadership and organizational change (Kotter, 2012; Lewis, 2011). Therefore, the
management team would benefit from a collective framing of the problem and united ideology
about addressing it. The recommended solution is to conduct management team workshops to
discuss and craft the team’s official approach to mitigating virtual employee burnout. The output
from these workshops will be a management team memorandum describing the management’s
framing of the problem and their commitment to mitigating it. The memorandum will be
published on office-wide portals and platforms.
Organizational culture is an organization’s accumulated learning that forms a pattern of
unconscious beliefs, values, and behaviors, and can be analyzed through consideration of
observable artifacts, espoused beliefs and values, and unconscious assumptions (Schein &
Schein, 2017). In a study analyzing survey data from 190 employees with structural equation
modeling through path analysis, Nikpour (2017) found that organizational culture had a positive
and significant impact on employee performance. Organizations in which leaders consistently
discuss desired organizational values and seek to define clear cultural aspirations are more
successful at effectuating the culture they aim for (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Leaders who
facilitate a unified vision as designers, teachers, and stewards build engaging and effective work
cultures (Senge, 1990). A comprehensive and unified management approach to mitigating virtual
employee burnout will enable managers to communicate the same message formally and
210

informally to all staff and facilitate shared office-wide values around the problem and how to
address it. A departure from obscurity and scattered leadership positions is necessary. The
literature on organizational cultural models affirms that managers must come together to
establish their desired beliefs and behaviors and place artifacts in widely used portals and
platforms to circulate their cultural aspirations.
Train Managers on Virtual Employee Burnout Mitigation
The data demonstrated that managers did not have substantive training on virtual
employee burnout mitigation. The recommended solution is rooted in learning and motivation
theory. Training is one of the key resources an organization can provide to bolster engagement
and performance as it facilitates the necessary knowledge, skills, and motivation (Aguinis &
Kraiger, 2009; Grossman & Salas, 2011; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Thus, training would
equip ACPO managers with the needed knowledge, skills, and motivation to mitigate virtual
employee burnout within the organization. The recommended solution is to provide synchronous
and asynchronous training to managers on virtual employee burnout mitigation best practices.
Organizations that ensure their staff (including managers) resource needs are met are
more likely to realize better outcomes (Odden & Picus, 2011; Waters et al., 2003). Training is
one of the most critical resources ACPO can provide to its managers to drive desired
organizational outcomes. In a study involving 440 training and development professionals,
Rosen et al. (2006) investigated the effectiveness of virtual team training programs and found
that programs that emphasized virtual manager training were more effective. In a meta-analytic
literature review with a multidisciplinary, multilevel, global perspective, Aguinis and Kraiger
(2009) outlined that work-based training has extensive positive impacts not only on
organizational outcomes but also adds immense value to individuals and society at large. The
211

literature supports the recommendation to provide synchronous and asynchronous training to
managers on virtual employee burnout mitigation best practices.
Institute Policies and Procedures to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout
The data found that ACPO did not have policies and procedures to facilitate virtual
employee burnout mitigation. The telework policy pre-dated the office-wide pivot to a remote
workforce and did not reflect the current reality. The recommended solution is rooted in
organizational management theory. Schneider et al. (1996) affirm that change is most effectively
catalyzed and sustained by altering everyday policies, practices, procedures, and routines,
thereby impacting the beliefs and values that guide employee actions. This statement suggests
that ACPO needs updated policies and procedures to reflect the new reality of a virtual office.
The recommended solution is to draft and institute virtual employee burnout mitigation policies
and procedures, inclusive of equity-based accommodations.
Updated telework policies and procedures would ensure all staff are clear on expectations
and clarify exceptions to general rules. Rules, policies, standards, and standard operating
procedures limit individual discretion and help ensure predictable and consistent behavior
(Bolman & Deal, 2017). Policies and procedures mitigate confusion and perceived unfairness
when each manager handles their team members in their own way. Policies and procedures also
facilitate organizational accommodations for the various home situations of virtual staff (Graham
et al., 2021; Lyttelton et al., 2022). Effective leaders address institutional policies and practices
that create barriers to equity (Bensimon, 2005). These research-based claims support the
recommendation to draft and institute virtual burnout mitigation policies and procedures,
inclusive of equity-based accommodations.
212

Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
A systematic deployment of the recommended solutions will increase the likelihood of a
successful intervention. An integrated strategy will bolster the operational implementation and
evaluation of the solutions.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The NWKM provides a potent framework for integrated implementation and evaluation.
The NWKM is designed to evaluate training deployments by assessing engagement, learning,
new behavior adoption, and desired business outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). As
illustrated in Figure 39, the model has four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results.
Although typically leveraged for training evaluations, the NWKM can also be used to evaluate
change interventions. The main difference between the NWKM and the original Kirkpatrick
model published in 1959 is the instructed order of implementation and evaluation. Instead of
starting with Level 1, reaction, the NWKM instructs evaluators to begin with Level 4, results.
Starting with the end in mind, the NWKM prioritizes the leading indicators and desired
outcomes the change initiative aims to deliver. Emphasizing the ultimate organizational
objectives of the intervention, the NWKM aligns expectations and actions and facilitates
accountability. The justification for each level resides in the logical progression of implementing
and evaluating a training initiative. The model’s four levels demonstrate the engagement,
adoption, application, and outcome achievement of interventions designed to improve
performance and drive organizational value. Table 26 outlines the descriptions of the four levels.

213

Figure 39
The New World Kirkpatrick Model

Note. Reprinted from Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation, by J. D. Kirkpatrick and
W. K. Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 11. ATD Publications. Copyright 2016 by Kirkpatrick Partners, LLC.

Table 26
Kirkpatrick’ s Four Levels of Training Evaluation
Level 1: Reaction Level 2: Reaction Level 3: Behavior Level 4: Results
The degree to which
participants find
the training
favorable,
engaging, and
relevant to their
jobs
The degree to which
participants acquire
the intended
knowledge, skills,
attitude,
confidence, and
commitment based
on their
participation in the
training
The degree to which
participants apply
what they learned
during training
when they are back
on the job
The degree to which
targeted outcomes
occur as a result of
the training and the
support and
accountability
package

Note. Adapted from Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation, by J. D. Kirkpatrick and
W. K. Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 19. ATD Publications. Copyright 2016 by Kirkpatrick Partners, LLC.
214

Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The organizational performance problem at the root of this study was mitigating virtual
employee burnout in ACPO. The ongoing achievement of ACPO’s mission is contingent on
employees who are engaged, equipped, and committed to fulfilling the demands of their roles.
Virtual employee burnout puts ACPO’s mission at risk. ACPO transitioned to a virtual staff in
the spring of 2020 in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. While there were numerous
personal and professional advantages to virtual work, employees reported in annual employee
feedback surveys that the lines between work, home and recreation were increasingly blurred.
They found themselves working longer, being more stressed about work, and always being “on.”
ACPO staff stated challenges posed by virtuality, including social isolation and difficulty
learning new systems and processes virtually. Of concern, 22% stated their workload as
unreasonable, a 5% increase from the prior year. In subsequent staff interviews, burnout emerged
as an organizational problem.
Due to the novelty of the problem, ACPO did not have a pre-existing strategy for
addressing virtual employee burnout. The novelty of the problem necessitated innovative
approaches and strategies for mitigating virtual employee burnout. A new organizational goal
was proposed to address the problem: by December 2024, all ACPO employees will participate
in an office-wide campaign to mitigate virtual employee burnout. Accountability arrangements
supported the conclusion that the management team was the stakeholder group with the most
power to facilitate sustainable change by meeting management preconditions for addressing
virtual employee burnout before implementing the office-wide campaign. The stakeholder
group’s goal was that, by May 2024, all managers would meet the management preconditions for
reducing virtual employee burnout by 100%. Management preconditions included being
215

educated, supported, and resourced to address virtual employee burnout with team members and
with the organization as a structural whole.
The recommended solutions aim to address KMO needs and assets for managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal. Educating, supported, and resourcing the management team to
mitigate virtual employee burnout will increase the likelihood of a successful outcome for the
subsequent office-wide virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign. The management team’s
failure to achieve their stakeholder goal would heighten the risk of a failed campaign due to
managers not having prior essential knowledge about virtual employee burnout, lacking
motivation to engage their staff on the issue, and not having the proper organizational supports.
The recommended solutions, rooted in organizational data and theoretical principles, are targeted
to equip managers where they need the most help, and where the organization would benefit the
most. The successful implementation of the recommended solutions will enable all managers to
meet the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout by 100% by May
2024.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Leading indicators establish a link between critical behaviors and desired results
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). External indicators depict external stakeholders’ response to
critical behavior performance, while internal indicators describe outcomes within the
organization. If the internal outcomes are met as expected because of ACPO managers’ critical
behaviors performance, then the external outcomes should also be realized. Table 27 shows the
proposed Level 4 results and leading indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics, and methods.

216

Table 27
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Data collection methods
External outcomes
Improved service delivery
to county departments.
Satisfaction scores for key
metrics: quality of service,
professionalism,
communication, quality of
procured goods and services,
fixed asset inventory
management.

Positive/negative feedback from
departmental leaders, project
managers, and liaisons.
Solicit data from annual
departmental customer
survey.

Feedback from quarterly
workshops and virtual
roadshow events for
departments.
Improved experience for
vendors.
Satisfaction scores for key
metrics: professionalism, staff
knowledge, staff problem
solving.
Solicit data from annual
vendor survey.
Attainment of NPI
Achievement of
Excellence in
Procurement (AEP)
Award.
AEP Award Professional
Development Criteria.
AEP Award Continuous
Improvement Criteria.
Solicit data from training,
certifications, and
conferences.
Solicit data from annual
employee, vendor, and
customer surveys.
Increased approval from
commissioners’ court.
The frequency of ACPO-related
issues during court sessions.
Funding for ACPO increased
operations (staff, technology,
etc.) budget to match
constituent growth.
Monthly report on frequency
of ACPO-related issues
during court sessions.
Solicit data from planning
and budget office
appropriations to ACPO.
Increased ACPO board
satisfaction.
Positive/Negative feedback from
board members.
Quarterly board report on
agency performance.
Internal outcomes
Increased job satisfaction. Statistics and coded employee
qualitative feedback on
workload, burnout, job
resources and feeling valued
and appreciated.
Coded performance
management qualitative
feedback.
Solicit data from annual
employee survey.
Solicit data from managers’
trimester 1:1s with direct
reports.
Increased employee
engagement.
Statistics and coded employee
feedback on engagement,
Solicit data from annual
employee survey.
217

Outcome Metrics Data collection methods
recognition, and work/life
balance.
Number of employees
volunteering for optional
projects.
Solicit data on employees’
voluntary participation in
optional projects.

Increased management
approval.
Statistics and coded employee
qualitative feedback on
management performance.
Coded qualitative feedback on
management.
Solicit data from annual
employee survey.
Solicit data from monthly
all-hands employee input
forms.
Increased retention. Number of employees who have
resigned.
Solicit data from human
resources department.
Decreased absenteeism. Number of sick and mental
health days.
Solicit data from human
resources department.
Improved employee
performance.
Number of accomplished office-
wide objectives and key
results
Number of accomplished team
objectives and key results.
Number of accomplished
individual objectives and key
results.
Solicit data from quarterly
and annual business
reviews.
Solicit data from quarterly
and annual business
reviews.
Solicit data from employee
performance management
forms.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors are a few specific and measurable activities that, if executed well, will
result in the desired Level 4 outcomes being realized (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Critical Behaviors
Achieving Level 4, results and leading indicators, is contingent on ACPO managers
engaging in the critical behaviors outlined in Level 3. The first critical behavior is managers’
developing and adhering to a clear and concise vision statement for virtual employee burnout
mitigation. The second critical behavior is managers incorporating virtual employee burnout
mitigation into office-wide, teams, and personal objectives and key results (OKRs). OKRs are a
218

strategic goal setting methodology in which objectives describe critical outcomes, and key
results refer to integral outputs associated with the desired outcomes (Doerr, 2018). Thirdly,
managers must acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to mitigate virtual employee burnout
within the organization. Next, managers need to integrate virtual employee burnout expectations
into their performance management policy and procedure. Lastly, managers must highlight
virtual employee burnout mitigation efforts in office-wide communications. The specific metrics,
methods, and timing for each of these critical behaviors are outlined in Table 28.

219

Table 28
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for ACPO Managers
Critical behavior Metrics
Data collection
methods
Timing
Manager will develop
a clear and concise
management team
vision statement for
virtual employee
burnout mitigation.
The vision statement
is approved by
leadership.
The vision statement
exists in writing.
Meeting minutes
indicating vision
statement is
adopted
Documents
containing the
documented vision
statement

Completed within 14
days and recited at
each meeting and
training session
related to virtual
employee burnout
mitigation.
Managers will
develop office-wide
OKRs that address
virtual employee
burnout.
Number of office-
wide, team, and
manager OKR
forms inclusive of
virtual employee
burnout mitigation

Director of
operations will
track OKR forms.
OKR forms to be
updated within 30
days and every
subsequent quarter
Managers will
perform the
promising practices
of mitigating virtual
employee burnout.

Number of managers
who perform the
promising practices
of mitigating virtual
employee burnout.
Director of
operations
provides promising
practice
observation data
sheet.
Initial training
within 90 days
with training
refreshers every
subsequent quarter

Managers will
integrate virtual
employee burnout
mitigation
expectations into
their performance
management policy
and procedure.
Number of formal
performance
management
meetings in which
managing virtual
employee burnout is
discussed.
Managers’ files are
updated with
virtual employee
burnout mitigation
performance.
Incorporate into next
monthly one-on-
one check-ins,
next trimester’s
CSS conversation
and the next
annual
performance
review. Continue
accordingly.

Managers will
highlight virtual
employee burnout
mitigation efforts in
office-wide
communications.
Number of newsletter
and all-hands
inclusions
Director of
operations will
track office-wide
communications
and all-hands
inclusions.
Begin in 30–60 days
and incorporate
into future
monthly
newsletter editions
and all-hands
meetings.
220

Required Drivers
Critical behaviors require oversight and direction. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016)
prescribe drivers to ensure critical behaviors are reinforced, encouraged, rewarded, and
monitored through contextualized systems, processes, and tasks. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s
(2016) required driver categories align well with Clark and Estes’ (2008)
KMO change influences. The reinforcing drivers align with knowledge-based recommendations,
ensuring managers are being trained and collectively educated. The encouraging and rewarding
drivers align with the motivation-based recommendations, enhancing managers’ expectancy-
value, self-efficacy, and attribution. The monitoring drivers align with the organization-based
recommendations, providing structural supports and resources. Table 29 shows the
recommended drivers to support ACPO managers’ critical behaviors along with the drivers’
KMO alignment.

Table 29
Required Drivers to Support ACPO Managers’ Critical Behaviors
Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
Reinforcing
(aligns with knowledge)
Training: provide training inclusive of new
information, job aids, demonstrations,
guided practice, and feedback on the
eight behaviors to build trust most
effectively with team members.
10-week training
program and
ongoing
1, 2, 3, 4
Socialized training: provide opportunities
for managers to be trained together on
best-practice coaching behaviors; and
share challenges, progress, and promising
practices with one another.
10-week training
program and
ongoing
1, 2, 3, 4
Education: Provide opportunities for
managers to learn and reflect on
literature-supported content on virtual
10-week training
program and
ongoing
1, 2, 3, 4
221

Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
work benefits and challenges, employee
engagement and burnout.
Provide guided metacognitive modeling
exercises for managers to configure and
reconfigure personal virtual employee
burnout mitigation strategies based on
educational resources.
10-week training
program and
ongoing
1, 2, 3, 4
Encouraging
(aligns with motivation)
Feedback and coaching from ACPO leader
on managing virtual employee burnout
best practices
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Collaborate with managers to develop
goals related to the management teams’
participation in the managing virtual
employee burnout initiative.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3, 4
Consistently emphasize expectancy
outcome of managers’ interventions –
managers can strengthen staff
engagement and performance by
mitigating virtual employee burnout.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
ACPO leader regularly sharing managers’
success stories with other managers
Ongoing 1, 3, 4, 5
Rewarding
(aligns with motivation)
Recognize each manager’s contribution to
virtual burnout mitigation to increase
their self-efficacy.
Ongoing 1, 3, 4, 5
Provide monitoring and positive feedback
on their performance to support
attribution. Managers can positively
impact desired outcomes.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Publish reports on staff engagement and
burnout to demonstrate the usefulness of
management interventions and reinforce
expectancy-value.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Monitoring
(aligns with organization)
Conduct management team workshops to
discuss and craft management’s official
approach to mitigating virtual employee
burnout.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Publish management memorandum on
management’s philosophy and
commitment to mitigating virtual
At training
program.
completion
1, 2, 3, 5
222

Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
employee burnout on office-wide portals
and platforms.
Provide synchronous and asynchronous
training to managers on virtual employee
burnout mitigation best practices.
Training program
and ongoing
1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Draft and institute virtual employee
burnout mitigation policies and
procedures, inclusive of equity-based
accommodations.
At training
program
completion
1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Organizational Support
Supports will also supplement critical behaviors and required drivers from critical
stakeholders within the organization: (a) ACPO PA and (b) director of operations. As the
organization's leader, the PA’s directives and expectations carry the most influence. If the
managers know they are directly accountable to the PA for performing the critical behaviors,
they will be more incentivized to deliver. The PA’s participation in the required drivers will
provide leadership direction and bolster the managers’ critical behaviors. Likewise, the director
of operations will incorporate the required drivers into the office’s operations. The director of
operations will oversee the respective administration of communications, resources, schedules,
and tasks to ensure the required drivers and managers’ critical behaviors are achieving the
desired external and internal results with measurable indicators.
Level 2: Learning
The integrated implementation and evaluation plan includes training and equipping the
stakeholder of focus with the requisite knowledge, skills, and attitudes to perform the critical
behaviors that will drive the desired outcomes. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define Level
2: Learning as “the degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude,
223

confidence and commitment based on their participation in the training” (p. 23). To fulfill Level
2 of the integrated implementation and evaluation plan, a training program on managing virtual
employee burnout will be deployed to equip ACPO managers accordingly. To support the
required drivers and the desired new manager critical behaviors, the training will specifically
target Level 3 critical behaviors. Designing the training includes establishing learning goals and
outlining program implementation and evaluation details.
Learning Goals
Following the completion of the VMT program, managers will be able to
• recognize the benefits and challenges of virtual work (conceptual knowledge),
• classify job demands and job resources (conceptual knowledge),
• determine the impacts of virtual work benefits and challenges on job demands and job
resources (conceptual knowledge),
• carry out steps to build trust with employees most effectively (procedural
knowledge),
• carry out steps to give feedback to employees most effectively (procedural
knowledge),
• integrate trust-building and feedback best practices into coaching employees on job
crafting to enhance job and personal resources (procedural knowledge),
• integrate trust-building and feedback best practices into coaching employees on self-
undermining behaviors that exacerbate job demands (procedural knowledge),
• reflect on personal virtual burnout and use best practices to mitigate it (metacognitive
knowledge),
224

• reflect on organizational burnout and use best-practice strategies to mitigate it
(metacognitive knowledge),
• value the usefulness of mitigating virtual employee burnout for organizational
effectiveness (expectancy-value),
• be confident in their ability to mitigate virtual employee burnout in direct reports and
the overall organization (self-efficacy), and
• attribute successful virtual employee burnout mitigation in the organization to their
leadership (attribution).
Program
The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved through VMT. This
training will equip managers with the essential knowledge and motivation to lead the office’s
virtual employee burnout mitigation efforts. The VMT program will be overseen by the director
of operations and executed through asynchronous and synchronous offerings over 10 weeks. The
asynchronous offering will leverage the office learning management system (LMS),
communications platform (MS Teams), and document repository (SharePoint). The director of
operations will oversee the preparation of 10 asynchronous modules consisting of reading
assignments, video links, and assessments. Each module will take managers approximately 2
hours to complete, with the expectation of completing one module per week. The modules will
progress in the following order: (a) virtual work benefits and challenges, (b) engagement and
burnout, (c) job resources and job demands, (d) how managers can moderate the impacts of
virtual work on job demands and job resources, (e) how to build trust with employees most
effectively, (f) how to give feedback most effectively, (g) job crafting and self-undermining
behaviors, (h) best practices for managing personal virtual employee burnout, (i) best-practice
225

strategies for managing organizational virtual employee burnout, (j) leading an office-wide
virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign.
The director of operations will also meet bi-weekly for a virtual 1:1 with each manager to
discuss the module content. These 1:1s will provide real-world contextualization to the module
content and bridge the gap between theory and application. These 1:1s will equip the managers
to reflect on the training and self-regulate. Synchronous programming for managers will
complement the asynchronous work. With a clear expectation of completing asynchronous
assignments before joint meetings, all managers will collectively meet with the ACPO PA and
director of operations once a week to review module content and discuss applications. Shared
stories of insights, challenges, and breakthroughs are instrumental for collective understanding,
motivation, and efficacy. Synchronous meetings will be held virtually for an hour and a half each
week and will consist of slide presentations, videos, breakout rooms, role-playing, peer-
modeling, and teaching back to one another. Leveraging social learning, the synchronous
meetings with strengthen the managers' understanding and equip them with the capability to lead
the virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign.
The asynchronous commitment (2 hours/week), meeting with the director of operations
(1 hour/bi-weekly), and synchronous meeting (1.5 hours/week) total 16 hours per month. Over
10 weeks, the total commitment of the VMT program will be 40 hours. After completing this
program, the managers will be substantially educated, resourced, and equipped to lead the office-
wide virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign.
The director of operations will also ensure the required drives are incorporated into the
VMT. He will monitor the execution of the required drivers to ensure the critical behaviors are
realized. This includes the training and education drivers for enhancing knowledge and skills,
226

inclusive of the job aids, demonstrations, guided practice, and metacognitive exercises. These
resources and exercises will be leveraged in the synchronous and asynchronous material and
discussed in 1:1 check-ins. To drive motivation, monitoring, structured feedback, and
recognition will also be incorporated into the program to aid the three motivation constructs of
expectancy-value, self-efficacy, and attribution. The director of operations will document
observations and share highlights and needs during 1:1s and synchronous sessions. The VMT is,
in effect, an organizational driver. It is the synchronous and asynchronous learning and
development vehicle to equip managers. The other organizational driver consists of virtual
employee burnout policies and procedures. The management team will develop these collectively
at the end of the VMT as a capstone assignment.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) outline five components for evaluating learning –
knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment. The knowledge component evaluates
declarative (factual and conceptual) knowledge, while the skills component assesses procedural
knowledge (Kump et al., 2015). The attitude component gauges the value the participants place
on the training for doing their job. The confidence learning component appraises how successful
participants believe they will be in applying their newly learned knowledge and skills. Lastly, the
commitment component captures participants’ dedication to applying their new learnings to their
work contexts. Table 30 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of
learning.

227

Table 30
Components of Learning for the Program
Data Collection methods or activities Timing
Declarative knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using open-text responses Before, during and after synchronous,
asynchronous, and 1:1 sessions
Director of operations’ observations and notes During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Share-outs during synchronous sessions During synchronous sessions
Procedural knowledge “I can do it right now.”
Mock-scenario demonstration of informal
manager/report 1:1
During synchronous sessions and 1:1 with
director of operations
Mock-scenario demonstration of formal
manager/report performance review
During synchronous sessions and 1:1 with
director of operations
Director of operations’ observations and notes During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Post-training value assessments After asynchronous and synchronous sessions
Director of operations’ observations and notes During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Discussions about value and engagement Before and during synchronous sessions and
1:1 with director of operations
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback During synchronous and 1:1 sessions
Post-training assessments After asynchronous and synchronous sessions
Director of operations’ observations and notes During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback During synchronous and 1:1 sessions
Director of operations’ observations and notes During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions

Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define Level 1: Reaction as the degree to which
participants find the training favorable, engaging, and relevant to their jobs. The components of
Level 1 evaluation include engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction. A combination of
228

formative and summative evaluations will be used to gather data on manager reactions to
training. Table 31 outlines Level 1: Reaction components and data collection methods.

Table 31
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Data collection methods or tools Timing
Engagement
Attendance in synchronous meetings and 1:1s During synchronous and 1:1 sessions
Completion of asynchronous LMS modules After LMS modules
Director of operations’ observations and
notes regarding active participation
During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Course evaluation At the conclusion of 10-week program
Relevance
Asynchronous modules pulse surveys During and after asynchronous sessions
Director of operations’ observations and
notes on relevance and contextualized
applications
During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Course evaluation At the conclusion of 10-week program
Customer satisfaction
Director of operations’ verbal pulse check During and after synchronous and 1:1
sessions
Course evaluation At the conclusion of 10-week program

229

Evaluation Tools
Achieving the learning goals is contingent on accomplishing the Level 2 components of
learning and Level 1 components of reactions. Success will be determined by evaluating these
components with contextualized tools. In addition to holistic evaluation, these tools will appraise
the program's asynchronous, synchronous, and 1:1 components.
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
During and immediately after the asynchronous LMS modules, open-text assessments
will be provided (see Appendix F). These assessments will gauge declarative and procedural
knowledge, training value, application confidence, and commitment. The director of operations
will also complete an evaluation form during and after synchronous and manager 1:1 sessions to
personally assess managers’ knowledge, value, confidence, engagement, sense of relevance, and
overall satisfaction (see Appendix G). Immediately following the last session of the 10-week
program, the director of operations will also administer a program evaluation assessment
(Appendix H).
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation
Approximately 1 month after the program, again at 3 months, and each subsequent
quarter for a year, the director of operations will administer a post-training survey to each
manager (see Appendix I). The survey will consist of open-text responses and appraise progress
on all four levels of the integrated implementation and evaluation plan. Giving the managers
time to process and implement components of the training, the post-training survey will evaluate
(a) managers’ overall satisfaction and perceptions of training content and relevance (Level 1), (b)
managers’ knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment in response to the training
230

(Level 2), (c) managers’ perceptions of their performance of the Level 3 critical behaviors, and
(d) managers’ perceptions of virtual employee burnout within the organization (Level 4).
Data Analysis and Reporting
The immediate and delayed evaluation instruments will provide data on the effectiveness
of the training. A digital dashboard will capture the value being created by the program. By
demonstrating results over time, dashboards demonstrate a program’s effectiveness and areas
where modifications may be needed, thereby impacting ongoing performance (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) stated that learning and performance
dashboards should focus on Level 4: Leading Indicators and Level 3: Critical behaviors, with a
few key Level 2: Learning status updates. The director of operations will oversee the design and
management of a digital reporting dashboard that is accessible to all staff through the office
SharePoint portal. The dashboard will have a combination of quantitative and qualitative data.
The home page will consist of tile tabs with the following links: external indicators, internal
indicators, critical behaviors, learning outcomes, comments, profiles, and files. The external and
internal indicators correspond to Level 4; the critical behaviors and learning outcomes
correspond to Levels 3 and 2, respectively.
To affirm, validate, and inspire the managers, the dashboard’s qualitative elements will
humanize the initiative. A comments section will display what managers and their team members
shared about actions colleagues have taken to mitigate colleague burnout. The profiles section
will profile each manager and highlight a few of their responses from the immediate and delayed
post-training evaluations. Displaying this data on the dashboard illustrates how each manager is
processing the training and will inspire fellow managers and colleagues. The files section will
serve as a document repository and reference for all training documents and data reports.
231

Appendix J provides examples of the dashboard, quantitative metrics displays, manager profile,
and comments sections. Figure 40 illustrates the desired gap closure because of the VMT.

Figure 40
Virtual Management Training Program Impact on Stakeholder Gap

232

Summary
The NWKM framework is an effective accountability mechanism for planning,
implementing, and evaluating ACPO managers’ targeted recommendations to achieve their
stakeholder and organizational goals for mitigating virtual employee burnout. The framework
recognizes the role of relationships, expectations, ambiguity, authority, and answerability.
Through the NWKM, the managers are enabled to deploy the recommended solutions and
demonstrate the intended value is being delivered. Within the NWKM framework, return on
expectations (ROE) is the critical determining factor for success. ROE reduces ambiguity,
defines value creation, and provides deliverable clarity (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In
accord with the stakeholder and organizational goals, the expectation of the intervention is that
managers will be equipped to mitigate virtual employee burnout and go on to lead a successful
office-wide virtual employee burnout mitigation campaign.
The NWKM creates a structure to ensure this expectation is systematically achieved. The
desired outcomes are stated with key indicators (Level 4); critical behaviors and required drivers
are identified, instituted, and monitored (Level 3); learning components of knowledge, skills,
attitudes, confidence, and commitment are established and evaluated (Level 2); and lastly,
participant impressions and satisfaction with the initiative are audited and addressed to facilitate
engagement (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The NWKM facilitates the integrated
implementation and evaluation of the recommended KMO solutions derived from the literature
233

review and case study findings. The NWKM operationalizes the steps for managers to
successfully mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framed this study. This approach’s core strength is
that the study was designed to solve a problem of practice within an organization. With that
context, the study employed a pragmatic paradigm of inquiry. Pragmatism begins with a problem
and aims to provide practical solutions for improving current and future practice (Saunders et al.,
2019). Pragmatism appreciates the viewpoints and methodologies of other inquiry paradigms and
leverages them, where appropriate, to solve problems of practice. Prioritizing workable
solutions, pragmatism also reflects a pluralistic approach to ontology, epistemology, and
axiology (Aliyu et al., 2015).
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis was selected as a theoretical framework because
there was a salient problem of practice to be solved through practical solutions. The problem of
virtual employee burnout is a growing global phenomenon. A case study in an organization
navigating the problem offered a context to investigate the problem and explore practical
solutions. The gap analysis considered a desired future state, the current state, and the influences
on the gap between the two states. The literature review in Chapter Two informed assumed
KMO influences on the gap. Chapters Three and Four documented the organizational case study
to investigate and validate the assumed influences. Validated needs and assets informed the
recommended solutions in Chapter Five. Consistent with pragmatism, the NWKM was
incorporated into the framework and leveraged to systematize the recommended solutions. The
strength of the approach is that it optimizes the likelihood of problem resolution.
234

The strength of the problem-solving approach also opens it to weaknesses from the points
of view of other paradigms of inquiry. The study was not designed to establish causal
relationships or extract how meaning is created, as framed by positivism and constructivism,
respectively. The data collection methodology was not designed to discover new knowledge but
to validate assumed a priori influences. Although the study’s mixed-methods design facilitated
triangulation via surveys, interviews, and documents, the data sources were not individually
scrutinized to the same degree they would have been if the study had been experimental or
ethnographic. Another weakness of the approach is the transferability of the case study findings.
The data were collected from a small cohort in one organization. The findings from this
organization are not inferred to represent the root causes of global virtual employee burnout. The
conceptual framework is one that all organizations can benefit from, however. Management in
any organization can mitigate virtual employee burnout by moderating the impacts of virtual
work’s benefits and challenges on job resources and job demands. Managers’ KMO contexts will
influence their ability to moderate these impacts.
Limitations and Delimitations
Projected limitations and delimitations of the study’s methodological design were
outlined in Chapter Three. These limitations and delimitations are restated in this section, along
with comments on their impact during the study and implications for improving the study.
Limitations refer to elements of the study beyond the researcher’s control (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Limitations of this study included limited data collection sources, the
challenges of participant feedback, and the duration of the study. Firstly, a larger sample without
as much personal history as this study’s participants may have provided more variance. The
qualitative document analysis was also limited to the documents the organization made
235

accessible. The data from actual reviews would have provided richer information for analysis
than the templates.
Secondly, the survey and interview data collection sources relied on ACPO managers’
personal feedback. Researcher-participant interaction also produces limitations, such as
reactivity (Maxwell, 2013). Outsider positionality may also reduce participant transparency.
These projections were realized. Upon distributing the surveys, I was told the managers were in
an extremely busy season of work, and I might need to send a few reminders to nudge
completion. My window for survey completion was 1 week, and multiple reminders within a
short time may have resulted in rushed survey responses. The interviews generally lasted 45
minutes to an hour, however. The managers appeared to welcome the opportunity to discuss the
topic. My outsider positionality may, indeed, have impacted the interview responses, as
managers were rarely critical of their organization. A longer window for data collection,
including more opportunities for qualitative data collection, such as focus groups, would have
likely yielded better data.
Thirdly, the data collection was limited to a fixed moment. A longitudinal study would
have assessed consistency over time (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Managers did not have the time
to process their responses deeply; they answered in the moment. Although the mixed-methods
design triangulating data collection methodologies and sources strengthened the study, it would
have been stronger without these limitations (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Patton, 2014).
Delimitations refer to researcher-imposed limitations on the study (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). As mentioned, the conceptual framework and stakeholder group of focus were conscious
delimitations. This study was context-specific, hindering generalizability. Although the literature
review spanned multiple international organizations and industries, the case study involved one
236

organization. A study examining the assumed KMO influences in multiple organizations would
have yielded more generalizable results. A strategic delimitation was the isolation of the specific
stakeholder group at the epicenter of power. This study did not consider employees’ role in
mitigating their burnout due to my need for convenience and access while conducting the study.
Data from the frontline employees would have yielded important information that could have
been corroborated with the data collected from managers. Employee data would have facilitated
a more nuanced analysis of the problem and informed more aligned solutions.
Future Research
The purpose of this innovation study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for ACPO managers to
achieve their stakeholder goal and go on to lead the achievement of an organizational virtual
employee burnout mitigation goal. The research questions guiding the study focused on the
managers’ KMO needs and corresponding solutions to meet their goal. The framing of the study
was specific to solving an intractable problem within an isolated organization. In the process of
developing assumed literature-based influences, it became apparent that this project was one of
the first attempts in the literature to marry the constructs of virtual work and burnout.
Although a growing practice since the 1970s, the COVID-19 pandemic thrust virtual
work into unprecedented normalcy. There will be retractions as the pandemic subsides, but
virtual work, to one degree or another, has become an expectation for most knowledge workers.
The public debate over virtual work has been dominated by where companies fall on the
spectrum of remote-first, hybrid, and full return to the office, while on the employee side,
workers demand the freedom to choose (Barrero et al., 2021). Future research on virtual work
will likely continue to investigate workers’ performance and the practices that enhance their
237

collaboration and productivity. Burnout research, as a component of occupational health
psychology, will likely continue to explore the causes and moderators of burnout in
organizational contexts.
This study provides a framework for future researchers to explore the unified construct of
virtual employee burnout. Introducing this unified construct to the literature yields numerous
research possibilities. Research could examine the moderating impact of virtual work’s benefits
and challenges on burnout. This study leveraged the comprehensive JD-R burnout framework in
its conceptual framework of virtual employee burnout; further research can unpack the
implications of each JD-R model proposition on the virtual work experience. Conversely,
research can leverage Leiter and Maslach’s (2004) AW model of burnout.
This study proposed management best practices for mitigating virtual employee burnout;
future research could examine the efficacy of each of the best practices. From a leadership lens,
research could be performed on the leadership styles that best mitigate this burnout. From a
learning and development perspective, future studies could examine virtual employee burnout
mitigation training programs. Structurally, are there organizational designs that mitigate virtual
employee burnout more than others? What are best-practice organizational policies that amplify
the benefits of virtual work while mitigating its challenges? Equity considerations with virtual
employee burnout also need to be further explored. Are there certain demographics that are
experiencing virtual employee burnout at higher levels? Are there management demographics
associated with higher levels of virtual employee burnout? What companies, countries, or
regions have demonstrated promising practices in high levels of virtual employee engagement
and well-being? Investigating these questions will contribute to the body of knowledge on this
238

nascent but universally relevant topic and inform practices that modify organizational behaviors,
improve workers’ quality of life, and redefine the future of work.
Conclusion
Virtual work and burnout are growing phenomena. They have been growing
independently of one another since they emerged in the academic literature over the last quarter
of the 20th century. The scale of virtual work brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic introduced
an interesting paradox: employees generally relished the ability to work from home but were
disoriented by new complexities straddling the work-home interface. This study explored virtual
employee burnout through an organizational case study. The ACPO became a fully remote office
during the pandemic, and while expressing unanimous gratitude for being a virtual office, several
employees reported sentiments of burnout in employee feedback platforms. Although adamant
about remaining a remote-first office, they reported challenges including working longer hours, a
lack of boundaries between work and home life, feeling of social isolation, and trouble learning
new processes and tools virtually. These challenges aligned well with the problem of practice for
this study of virtual employee burnout.
The theoretical framework employed for this study was Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis framework. The gap analysis was adapted into an innovation model to accommodate the
goal of mitigating virtual employee burnout. This conceptual framework was leveraged to
identify and examine ACPO managers’ KMO needs to reach their performance goal related to
achieving management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout. The management
team was selected as the stakeholder of focus because employee efforts to mitigate virtual
burnout would be stifled if managers were not previously educated, supported, and resourced to
lead mitigation efforts.
239

The new organizational performance goal to mitigate virtual employee burnout was that,
by December 2024, all employees would participate in an office-wide campaign to mitigate
virtual employee burnout. The managers’ goal was that, by May 2024, all would meet the
management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout by 100%. Since virtual
employee burnout was a nascent topic with limited peer-reviewed literature, the literature review
explored the literature on virtual work and burnout, respectively, and then incorporated a unified
construct of virtual employee burnout into the conceptual framework. Influenced by Demerouti
et al.’s (2001) JD-R model of burnout, the definition of virtual employee burnout in this study
was the experience of employee burnout syndrome in virtual workers caused by virtuality-related
job demands and insufficient job resources to buffer said job demands. In the conceptual
framework, managers impacted virtual work’s effects on job demands and resources. On this
premise, the study proposed 11 literature-based assumed KMO influences for managers to
achieve their goal to meet management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout.
Managers’ KMO needs and assets informed recommended solutions for them to achieve
their goal. A mixed-methods explanatory sequential study investigated each of the 11 assumed
influences. The analysis found seven of the assumed influences were needs, and the remaining
four were assets the management team already possessed. These need and asset determinations
informed the recommended solutions for managers to achieve their goal. Overall, the managers
were motivated to meet their preconditions, but they did not have the procedural and
metacognitive knowledge or the needed organizational values and resources. The recommended
solutions targeted closing these gaps through training, education, consensus-building, and
organizational policies. The NWKM facilitated an integrated implementation and evaluation of
240

the recommended solutions by operationalizing the steps for managers to successfully achieve
their goal.
Unmitigated virtual employee burnout will harm American workers’ engagement, health,
and well-being. This harm could trigger detrimental second and third-order effects on the
workforce and economic systems. As the boundaries between work and home become more
porous, the future of work is also the future of our social institutions. Since the Industrial
Revolution, the factory or office has dictated populations’ schedules and locations. Childcare,
schools, city planning, suburban development, utility infrastructures, and transportation networks
are just a few systems built on the premise that laborers go to their employers’ locations for work
during core working hours each weekday. The recent scale of virtual work proposed a revolution
in how these systems are organized. The jolts to the regular rhythms of life during the COVID-
19 pandemic invited billions of people to collectively question what has been normative for so
long.
As a new paradigm of the work-home interface emerges with all its implications on
society, this nascent study considered the impact of wide-scale virtual work on employees’
performance and well-being through the lens of burnout. The study also placed responsibility on
organizational managers to lead the way in mitigating the problem. Merging the literature on
virtual work and burnout, the study’s main contribution to researchers and practitioners is a
conceptual framework for understanding a unified construct of virtual employee burnout. The
organizational case study exemplifies how the framework can be leveraged to effectuate strategic
change. As social and economic paradigms rapidly evolve, may future researchers build on this
work in their exploration of the future of work and the future of human flourishing.
241

References
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Alarcon, G., Eschleman, K. J., & Bowling, N. A. (2009). Relationships between personality
variables and burnout: A meta-analysis. Work and Stress, 23(3), 244–263.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370903282600
Alarcon, G. M. (2011). A meta-analysis of burnout with job demands, resources, and attitudes.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 549–562.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.007
Albrecht, S., Breidahl, E., & Marty, A. (2018). Organizational resources, organizational
engagement climate, and employee engagement. Career Development International,
23(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-04-2017-0064
Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M. (2015). Employee
engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage. Journal
of Organizational Effectiveness, 2(1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-08-2014-
0042
Ale Ebrahim, N., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2009). Virtual teams: A literature review. Australian
Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(3), 2653–2669.
Alfes, K., Shantz, A. D., Truss, C., & Soane, E. C. (2013). The link between perceived human
resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: A moderated
mediation model. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 330–
351. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.679950
242

Aliyu, A. A., Singhry, I. M., Haruna, A., & Abubakar, M. M. (2015). Ontology, epistemology
and axiology in quantitative and qualitative research: Elucidation of the research
philosophical misconception. In Proceedings of the Academic Conference:
Mediterranean Publications & Research International on New Direction and Uncommon
(Vol. 2, No. 1.). December 22, 2015- University of Agric, Abeokuta, Abeokuta, Ogun
State, Nigeria.
Alkin, M. C., & Vo, A. T. (2017). Evaluation essentials: From A to Z. Guilford Publications.
Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting?
Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public
Interest. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(2), 40–68.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615593273
Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work-family conflict
and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2),
345–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12012
Al Mehrzi, N., & Singh, S. K. (2016). Competing through employee engagement: A proposed
framework. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 65(6),
831–843. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2016-0037
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works. Jossey-Bass.
American Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education.
(2015). Top 20 principles from psychology for preK–12 teaching and learning.
http://www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/toptwenty-principles.pdf
243

Anderson, J., Bricout, J. C., & West, M. D. (2001). Telecommuting: Meeting the needs of
businesses and employees with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 16(2),
97–104.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Avery, C., & Zabel, D. (2001). The flexible workplace: A sourcebook of information and
research. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Azanza, G., Moriano, J. A., Molero, F., & Lévy Mangin, J. (2015). The effects of authentic
leadership on turnover intention. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
36(8), 955–971. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2014-0056
Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, new directions,
and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4),
383–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.144
Bakaç, C., Zyberaj, J., & Barela, J. C. (2021). Predicting employee telecommuting preferences
and job outcomes amid COVID-19 pandemic: A latent profile analysis. Current
Psychology. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02496-8
Baker, L. (2006). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively
oriented reading instruction. In S. E. Israel, C. Collins Block, K. L. Bauserman, & K.
Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 83–102). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410613301
Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: Current trends. Career Development
International, 23(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207
244

Bakker, A. B., & Costa, P. L. (2014). Chronic job burnout and daily functioning: A theoretical
analysis. Burnout Research, 1(3), 112–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2014.04.003
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands‐resources model: State of the art. MCB
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands-resources theory: Taking stock and looking
forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Euwema, M. C. (2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job
demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-
8998.10.2.170
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The
JD-R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands‐resources model to
predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83-104.
Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost
work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 99(2), 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
Bakker, A. B., & Leiter, M. P. (Eds.). (2010). Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory
and research. Psychology press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203853047
245

Bakker, A. B., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2013). Weekly work engagement and flourishing: The role
of hindrance and challenge job demands. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 397–
409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.06.008
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An
emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22(3), 187–200.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649
Bakker, A. B., Van Emmerik, H., & Van Riet, P. (2008). How job demands, resources, and
burnout predict objective performance: A constructive replication. Anxiety, Stress, and
Coping. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 21(3), 309–324.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10615800801958637
Bakker, A. B., van Veldhoven, M., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2010). Beyond the demand-control
model: Thriving on high job demands and resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology,
9(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000006
Bakker, A. B., & Wang, Y. (2020). Self-undermining behavior at work: Evidence of construct
and predictive validity. International Journal of Stress Management, 27(3), 241–251.
https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000150
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great Minds in Management (pp. 9–35). Oxford University Press.
246

Barber, L. K., & Jenkins, J. S. (2014). Creating technological boundaries to protect bedtime:
Examining work-home boundary management, psychological detachment and sleep.
Stress and Health, 30(3), 259–264. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2536
Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2021). Why working from home will stick. National
Bureau of Economic Research., https://doi.org/10.3386/w28731
Barsness, Z. I., Diekmann, K. A., & Seidel, M. L. (2005). Motivation and opportunity: The role
of remote work, demographic dissimilarity, and social network centrality in impression
management. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 401–419.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.17407906
Bartel, C. A., Wrzesniewski, A., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (2012). Knowing where you stand:
Physical isolation, perceived respect, and organizational identification among virtual
employees. Organization Science, 23(3), 743–757.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0661
Basile, K. A., & Beauregard, T. A. (2016). Strategies for successful telework: How effective
employees manage work/home boundaries. Strategic HR Review, 15(3), 106–111.
https://https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-03-2016-0024
Beauregard, T. A., & Henry, L. C. (2009). Making the link between work-life balance practices
and organizational performance. Human Resource Management Review, 19(1), 9–22.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.09.001
Bedarkar, M., & Pandita, D. (2014). A study on the drivers of employee engagement impacting
employee performance. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133, 106–115.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.174
247

Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2002). A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective
leadership. Group & Organization Management, 27(1), 14–49.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601102027001003
Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99–111.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.190
Bentley, T. A., Teo, S. T., McLeod, L., Tan, F., Bosua, R., & Gloet, M. (2016). The role of
organisational support in teleworker wellbeing: A socio-technical systems approach.
Applied Ergonomics, 52, 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.07.019
Berger, R., Czakert, J. P., Leuteritz, J., & Leiva, D. (2019). How and when do leaders influence
employees’ well-being? Moderated mediation models for job demands and resources.
Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2788. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02788
Bick, A., Blandin, A., & Mertens, K. (2020). Work from home after the COVID-19 outbreak.
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. https://www.dallasfed.org/-/media/documents/
research/papers/2020/wp2017r1.pdf
Binnewies, C., & Sonnentag, S. (2008). Recovery after work: Unwinding from daily job stress.
In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The long work hours culture: Causes,
consequences and choices (pp. 275–294). Emerald.
Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2015). Does working from home work?
Evidence from a Chinese experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 165–
218. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju032
248

Boamah, S. A., & Laschinger, H. (2016). The influence of areas of worklife fit and work‐life
interference on burnout and turnover intentions among new graduate nurses. Journal of
Nursing Management, 24(2), E164–E174. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12318
Boell, S. K., Cecez‐Kecmanovic, D., & Campbell, J. (2016). Telework paradoxes and practices:
The importance of the nature of work. New Technology, Work and Employment, 31(2),
114–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12063
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119281856
Bonnet, D., & Westerman, G. (2021). The new elements of digital transformation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 62(2), 82–89.
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810379799
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research
Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2011). Neuroscience and leadership: The promise of insights. Ivey
Business Journal, 75(1), 1-3.
Breevaart, K., Bakker, A., Hetland, J., Demerouti, E., Olsen, O. K., & Espevik, R. (2014). Daily
transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee engagement. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(1), 138–157.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12041
249

Breslau, B., & Ramseur, S. (2021, December 6). Addressing the burnout, loneliness, and
indifference associated with remote work. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/sponsored/2021/12/addressing-the-burnout-loneliness-and-indifference-
associated-with-remote-work
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-
analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as
moderators. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151–1177.
https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000113
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., Hibben, F., & Hertel, G. (2020). Trust in teams: A taxonomy of
perceived trustworthiness factors and risk-taking behaviors in face-to-face and virtual
teams. Human Relations, 73(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718818721
Brim, B., & Asplund, J. (2009, November 12). Drive engagement by focusing on strengths.
Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/124214/driving-engagement-focusing-
strengths.aspx
Brom, S. S., Buruck, G., Horváth, I., Richter, P., & Leiter, M. P. (2015). Areas of worklife as
predictors of occupational health–A validation study in two German samples. Burnout
Research, 2(2-3), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2015.05.001
Brougham, D., & Haar, J. (2018). Smart technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and
algorithms (STARA): Employees’ perceptions of our future workplace. Journal of
Management & Organization, 24(2), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2016.55
Brynjolfsson, E., Horton, J. J., Ozimek, A., Rock, D., Sharma, G., & TuYe, H. Y. (2020).
COVID-19 and remote work: An early look at US data (No. w27344). National Bureau of
Economic Research.
250

Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2019). The feedback fallacy. Harvard Business Review, 97(2),
92–101.
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (Eds.). (2020). Research
design and methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner. Sage Publications.
Butts, M. M., Becker, W. J., & Boswell, W. R. (2015). Hot buttons and time sinks: The effects of
electronic communication during nonwork time on emotions and work-nonwork conflict.
Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 763–788.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0170
Cameron, S., & Fox, M. (2011). Working from home: leisure gain or leisure loss? In S. Cameron
(Ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Leisure (pp. 128–152). Edward Elgar.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857930569.00014
Caniëls, M. C., Semeijn, J. H., & Renders, I. H. M. (2018). Mind the mindset! The interaction of
proactive personality, transformational leadership and growth mindset for engagement at
work. Career Development International, 23(1), 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-
2016-0194
Carter, W. R., Nesbit, P. L., Badham, R. J., Parker, S. K., & Sung, L. (2018). The effects of
employee engagement and self-efficacy on job performance: A longitudinal field study.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(17), 2483–2502.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1244096
Cascio, W. F., & Montealegre, R. (2016). How technology is changing work and organizations.
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 349–375.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062352
251

Castillo, E. A., & Trinh, M. P. (2019). Catalyzing capacity: Absorptive, adaptive, and generative
leadership. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32(3), 356–376.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-04-2017-0100
Chan, X. W., Kalliath, T., Brough, P., O’Driscoll, M., Siu, O.-L., & Timms, C. (2017). Self-
efficacy and work engagement: Test of a chain model. International Journal of
Manpower, 38(6), 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-11-2015-0189
Charalampous, M., Grant, C. A., & Tramontano, C. (2022). “It needs to be the right blend”: A
qualitative exploration of remote e-workers’ experience and well-being at work.
Employee Relations, 44(2), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-02-2021-0058
Charalampous, M., Grant, C. A., 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.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1541886
Charlier, S. D., Stewart, G. L., Greco, L. M., & Reeves, C. J. (2016). Emergent leadership in
virtual teams: A multilevel investigation of individual communication and team
dispersion antecedents. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(5), 745–764.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.05.002
Chen, Y., Chu, H., & Wang, P. (2021). Employee assistance programs: A meta‐analysis. Journal
of Employment Counseling, 58(4), 144–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/joec.12170
Chesley, N. (2014). Information and communication technology use, work intensification and
employee strain and distress. Work, Employment and Society, 28(4), 589–610.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017013500112
252

Chugh, A. (2021). What is 'The Great Resignation'? An expert explains. World Economic
Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/11/what-is-the-great-resignation-and-
what-can-we-learn-from-it/
Clark, L. A., Karau, S. J., & Michalisin, M. D. (2012). Telecommuting attitudes and the ‘big
five’ personality dimensions. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 13(3), 31–46.
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
Clark, R., Yates, K., Early, S., & Moulton, K. (2010). An analysis of the failure of electronic
media and discovery-based learning: Evidence for the performance benefits of guided
training methods. In K. H. Silber & R. Foshay (Eds.). Handbook of training and
improving workplace performance: Vol. 1. Instructional design and training delivery (pp.
263–297). Wiley.
Colbert, A., Yee, N., & George, G. (2016). The digital workforce and the workplace of the
future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 731–739.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4003
Collins, A. M., Hislop, D., & Cartwright, S. (2016). Social support in the workplace between
teleworkers, office‐based colleagues and supervisors. New Technology, Work and
Employment, 31(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12065
Cordery, J., Cripps, E., Gibson, C. B., Soo, C., Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. (2015). The
Operational Impact of Organizational Communities of Practice: A Bayesian Approach to
Analyzing Organizational Change. Journal of Management, 41(2), 644–664.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314545087
253

Cordery, J. L., & Soo, C. (2008). Overcoming impediments to virtual team effectiveness. Human
Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 18(5), 487–500.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20119
Courtney, E. (2021, April 27). 30 companies switching to long-term remote work [Blog post].
Flexjobs. https://www.flexjobs.com/blog/post/companies-switching-remote-work-long-
term/
Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to
employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research
(3rd ed.). Sage publications.
Crosbie, T., & Moore, J. (2004). Work-life balance and working from home. Social Policy and
Society, 3(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746404001733
Cross, R. (2021). How successful people thrive in a hyper-connected world. Leader to Leader,
2021(102), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.20602
Day, A., & Randell, K. D. (2014). Building a foundation for psychologically healthy workplaces
and well-being. In A. Day, E. K. Kelloway, & J. J. Hurrell, Jr., (Eds.), Workplace well-
being: How to build psychologically healthy workplaces (pp. 3–26). Wiley Blackwell.
Deery, S., Walsh, J., & Guest, D. (2011). Workplace aggression: The effects of harassment on
job burnout and turnover intentions. Work, Employment and Society, 25(4), 742–759.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017011419707
254

Delanoeije, J., Verbruggen, M., & Germeys, L. (2019). Boundary role transitions: A day-to-day
approach to explain the effects of home-based telework on work-to-home conflict and
home-to-work conflict. Human Relations, 72(12), 1843–1868.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718823071
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Bulters, A. J. (2004). The loss spiral of work pressure, work-
home interference and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in a three-wave study. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00030-7
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-
resources model of burnout. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499
Dery, K., & Hafermalz, E. (2016). Seeing is belonging: Remote working, identity and staying
connected. In J. Lee (Ed.), The impact of ICT on work (pp. 109–126). Springer
Singapore., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-612-6_6
De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., & Van Hootegem, G. (2016). Not all autonomy is the same:
Different dimensions of job autonomy and their relation to work engagement &
innovative work behavior. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 26(4),
515–527. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20666
de Vries, H., Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2019). The benefits of teleworking in the public
sector: Reality or rhetoric? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(4), 570–593.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X18760124
Dingel, J. I., & Neiman, B. (2020). How many jobs can be done at home? Journal of Public
Economics, 189, Article 104235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104235
255

Doerr, J. (2018). Measure what matters: How Google, Bono, and the Gates Foundation rock the
world with OKRs. Penguin.
Duke, N. K., & Martin, N. M. (2011). 10 things every literacy educator should know about
research. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.65.1.2
Dulebohn, J. H., & Hoch, J. E. (2017). Virtual teams in organizations. Human Resource
Management Review, 27(4), 569–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.004
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
Ellwart, T., Happ, C., Gurtner, A., & Rack, O. (2015). Managing information overload in virtual
teams: Effects of a structured online team adaptation on cognition and performance.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 812–826.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.1000873
Farndale, E., Beijer, S. E., Van Veldhoven, M. J., Kelliher, C., & Hope-Hailey, V. (2014).
Work and organization engagement: Aligning research and practice. Journal of
Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 1(2), 157–176.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2014-0015
Feldt, T., Rantanen, J., Hyvonen, K., Makikangas, A., Huhtala, M., Pihlajasaari, P., and
Kinnunen, U. (2014). The 9-item Bergen Burnout Inventory: Factorial validity across
organizations and measurements of longitudinal data. Industrial Health, 52 (2), 102–112.
https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2013-0059
Felstead, A., & Henseke, G. (2017). Assessing the growth of remote working and its
consequences for effort, well‐being and work‐life balance. New Technology, Work and
Employment, 32(3), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12097
256

Felstead, A., Jewson, N., Phizacklea, A., & Walters, S. (2002). Opportunities to work at home in
the context of work‐life balance. Human Resource Management Journal, 12(1), 54–76.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2002.tb00057.x
Feng, Z., & Savani, K. (2020). Covid-19 created a gender gap in perceived work productivity
and job satisfaction: Implications for dual-career parents working from home. Gender in
Management, 35(7/8), 719–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-07-2020-0202
Fink, A. (2016). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (6th ed.). Sage.
Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2010). Why teleworkers are more satisfied with their jobs than
are office-based workers: When less contact is beneficial. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 38(4), 336–361.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2010.513998
Fonner, K. L., & Stache, L. C. (2012). All in a day’s work, at home: Teleworkers’ management
of micro role transitions and the work–home boundary. New Technology, Work and
Employment, 27(3), 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00290.x
Ford, R. C., Piccolo, R. F., & Ford, L. R. (2017). Strategies for building effective virtual teams:
Trust is key. Business Horizons, 60(1), 25–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.08.009
Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burn‐out. The Journal of Social Issues, 30(1), 159–165.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x
Fukumura, Y. E., Schott, J. M., Lucas, G. M., Becerik-Gerber, B., & Roll, S. C. (2021).
Negotiating time and space when working from home: Experiences during COVID-19.
OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health, 41(4), 223–231.
https://doi.org/10.1177/15394492211033830
257

Fuller, R. M., Vician, C. M., & Brown, S. A. (2016). Longitudinal effects of computer-mediated
communication anxiety on interaction in virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication, 59(3), 166–185.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2016.2583318
Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about
telecommuting: Meta-Analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences.
Journal of Applied Psychology. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524–1541.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524
Gajendran, R. S., Harrison, D. A., & Delaney‐Klinger, K. (2015). Are telecommuters remotely
good citizens? Unpacking telecommuting’s effects on performance via i‐deals and job
resources. Personnel Psychology, 68(2), 353–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12082
Galanti, T., Guidetti, G., Mazzei, E., Zappalà, S., & Toscano, F. (2021). Work from home during
the COVID-19 outbreak: The impact on employees’ remote work productivity,
engagement and stress. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(7),
e426–e432. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000002236
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Gallup, Inc. (2020). Gallup’s perspective on employee burnout: Causes and cures.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/282668/employee-burnout-perspective-paper.aspx
García‐Sierra, R., Fernández‐Castro, J., & Martínez‐Zaragoza, F. (2016). Relationship between
job demand and burnout in nurses: Does it depend on work engagement? Journal of
Nursing Management, 24(6), 780–788. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12382
258

Garro-Abarca, V., Palos-Sanchez, P., & Aguayo-Camacho, M. (2021). Virtual teams in times of
pandemic: Factors that influence performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article
624637. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.624637
Gascón, S., Leiter, M. P., Stright, N., Santed, M. A., Montero-Marín, J., Andrés, E., Asensio-
Martínez, A., & García-Campayo, J. (2013). A factor confirmation and convergent
validity of the “areas of worklife scale” (AWS) to Spanish translation. Health and
Quality of Life Outcomes, 11(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-63
George, B. (2021). Successful strategic plan implementation in public organizations: Connecting
people, process, and plan (3Ps). Public Administration Review, 81(4), 793–798.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13187
Gilbert, S., Horsman, P., & Kelloway, E. K. (2016). The motivation for transformational
leadership scale: An examination of the factor structure and initial tests. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 37(2), 158–180. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-
2014-0086
Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Jones Young, N. C., Vartiainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2015).
Virtual teams research: 10 Years, 10 Themes, and 10 Opportunities. Journal of
Management, 41(5), 1313–1337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314559946
Glass, J. L., & Noonan, M. C. (2016). Telecommuting and earnings trajectories among American
women and men 1989–2008. Social Forces, 95(1), 217–250.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow034
Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (6th ed.). Pearson.
Global Workplace Analytics. (2021). Telecommuting Statistics. Global Workplace Analytics.
https://globalworkplaceanalytics.com/telecommuting-statistics
259

Goh, J., Pfeffer, J., & Zenios, S. A. (2016). The relationship between workplace stressors and
mortality and health costs in the United States. Management Science, 62(2), 608–628.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2115
Golden, T. D. (2006a). The role of relationships in understanding telecommuter satisfaction.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.369
Golden, T. D. (2006b). Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Telework and the intervening impact
of work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 69(1), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.02.003
Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The impact of professional isolation on
teleworker 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. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1412–
1421. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012722
Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommuting’s differential impact on work-
family conflict: Is there no place like home? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6),
1340–1350. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1340
González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work
engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior,
68(1), 165–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.003
Gordon, H. J., Demerouti, E., Le Blanc, P. M., Bakker, A. B., Bipp, T., & Verhagen, M. A.
(2018). Individual job redesign: Job crafting interventions in healthcare. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 104, 98–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.07.002
260

Graham, M., Weale, V., Lambert, K. A., Kinsman, N., Stuckey, R., & Oakman, J. (2021).
Working at Home: The impacts of COVID 19 on health, family-work-life conflict,
gender, and parental responsibilities. Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, 63(11), 938–943. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000002337
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. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08-2012-0059
Gregory, S. T., & Menser, T. (2015). Burnout among primary care physicians: A test of the areas
of worklife model. Journal of Healthcare Management, 60(2), 133–148.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00115514-201503000-00009
Grossman, R., & Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: What really matters. International
Journal of Training and Development, 15(2), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2419.2011.00373.x
Guest, D. E. (2013). Employee engagement: Fashionable fad or long-term fixture? In C. Truss,
K. Alfes, R. Delbridge, A. Shantz, & E. Soane (Eds.), Employee engagement in theory
and practice (pp. 235–249). Routledge.
Gutermann, D., Lehmann‐Willenbrock, N., Boer, D., Born, M., & Voelpel, S. C. (2017). How
leaders affect followers’ work engagement and performance: Integrating leader-member
exchange and crossover theory. British Journal of Management, 28(2), 299–314.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12214
Hacker, J. V., Johnson, M., Saunders, C., & Thayer, A. L. (2019). Trust in virtual teams: A
multidisciplinary review and integration. Australasian Journal of Information Systems,
23, 23. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v23i0.1757
261

Haddon, L., & Lewis, A. (1994). The experience of teleworking: An annotated review.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(1), 193–223.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585199400000010
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2005). How dentists cope with their job
demands and stay engaged: The moderating role of job resources. European Journal of
Oral Sciences, 113(6), 479–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00250.x
Halbesleben, J. R. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout,
demands, resources, and consequences. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work
engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 102–117). Psychology
Press.
Halbesleben, J. R., & Demerouti, E. (2005). The construct validity of an alternative measure of
burnout: Investigating the English translation of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory. Work
and Stress, 19(3), 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500340728
Hammer, L. B., Demsky, C. A., Bray, J. W., & Kossek, E. E. (2016). Work-family intervention
research. In T. A. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and family
(pp. 349–361). Oxford University Press.
Harding, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: From start to finish. Sage.
Hareli, S. (2018). Attribution theory. In B. Frey (Ed.), Sage encyclopedia of educational
research, measurement, and evaluation (pp. 144-147). Sage Publications.
https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139
Harter, J. (2022). U.S. employee engagement drops for first year in a decade. Gallup.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/388481/employee-engagement-drops-first-year-
decade.aspx
262

Hartig, T., Kylin, C., & Johansson, G. (2007). The telework tradeoff: Stress mitigation vs.
constrained restoration. Applied Psychology, 56(2), 231–253.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00252.x
Harvey, P., Madison, K., Martinko, M., Crook, T. R., & Crook, T. A. (2014). Attribution theory
in the organizational sciences: The road traveled and the path ahead. The Academy of
Management Perspectives, 28(2), 128–146. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0175
Hayes, S. W., Priestley, J. L., Moore, B. A., & Ray, H. E. (2021). Perceived stress, work-related
burnout, and working from home before and during COVID-19: An examination of
workers in the United States. SAGE Open, 11. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211058193
Heiden, M., Widar, L., Wiitavaara, B., & Boman, E. (2020). Telework in academia: Associations
with health and well-being among staff. Higher Education, 81(4), 707–722.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00569-4
Hendel, T., & Kagan, I. (2014). Organisational values and organisational commitment: Do
nurses’ ethno‐cultural differences matter? Journal of Nursing Management, 22(4), 499–
505. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12010
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. Urban
Education, Spring/Summer, 17–19.
Hilbrecht, M., Shaw, S. M., Johnson, L. C., & Andrey, J. (2008). ‘I’m home for the kids’:
Contradictory implications for work-life balance of teleworking mothers. Gender, Work
and Organization, 15(5), 454–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00413.x
263

Hill, N. S., & Bartol, K. M. (2016). Empowering leadership and effective collaboration in
geographically dispersed teams. Personnel Psychology. Personnel Psychology, 69(1),
159–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12108
Hill, N. S., & Bartol, K. M. (2018). Five ways to improve communication in virtual teams. MIT
Sloan Management Review, 60(1), 1–5.
Hirsch, P. B. (2021). The great discontent. The Journal of Business Strategy, 42(6), 439–442.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-08-2021-0141
Hobfoll, S. E., and Freedy, J. (1993). Conservation of resources: A general stress theory applied
to burnout. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, and T. Marek (Eds.), Professional Burnout:
Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 115–129). Taylor & Francis.
Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources
in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103-128.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
Hobfoll, S. E., Johnson, R. J., Ennis, N., & Jackson, A. P. (2003). Resource loss, resource gain,
and emotional outcomes among inner city women. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 84(3), 632–643. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.632
Horwitz, F. M., Bravington, D., & Silvis, U. (2006). The promise of virtual teams: Identifying
key factors in effectiveness and failure. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(6),
472-494. https://https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590610688843
Iansiti, M., & Richards, G. (2020). Coronavirus is widening the corporate digital divide. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/03/coronavirus-is-widening-the-corporate-digital-
divide
264

Ioannou, A., Lycett, M., & Marshan, A. (2022). The role of mindfulness in mitigating the
negative consequences of technostress. Information Systems Frontiers. Published online
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10239-0
Jamal, M. T., Anwar, I., Khan, N. A., & Saleem, I. (2021). Work during COVID-19: Assessing
the influence of job demands and resources on practical and psychological outcomes for
employees. Asia - Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 13(3), 293–319.
https://https://doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-05-2020-0149
Jin, W., Zhang, Y., & Wang, X. (2015). Job burnout and organizational justice among medical
interns in Shanghai, People’s Republic of China. Advances in Medical Education and
Practice, 6, 539–544. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S88953
Johnson, A., Dey, S., Nguyen, H., Groth, M., Joyce, S., Tan, L., Glozier, N., & Harvey, S. B.
(2020). A review and agenda for examining how technology-driven changes at work will
impact workplace mental health and employee well-being. Australian Journal of
Management, 45(3), 402–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896220922292
Johnson, L. C., Andrey, J., & Shaw, S. M. (2007). Mr. Dithers comes to dinner: Telework and
the merging of women’s work and home domains in Canada. Gender, Place and Culture,
14(2), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690701213701
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2020). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches (7th ed.). SAGE.
Juan, S. H., Ting, I. W. K., Kweh, Q. L., & Yao, L. (2018). How does knowledge sharing affect
employee engagement? Institutions and Economies, 10(4), 49–67.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/188217227.pdf
265

Kahn, R. L., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 571–650). Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287
Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45(4),
321–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679204500402
Kane, G. C., Phillips, A. N., Copulsky, J., & Andrus, G. (2019). How digital leadership is (n’t)
different. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(3), 34–39.
Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life.
Basic Books.
Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job
redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–308.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498
Karatepe, O. M., & Demir, E. (2014). Linking core self-evaluations and work engagement to
work-family facilitation: A study in the hotel industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(2), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-
01-2013-0008
Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the
intensification of work. Human Relations, 63(1), 83–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709349199
266

Kim, S., Park, Y., & Headrick, L. (2018). Daily micro-breaks and job performance: General
work engagement as a cross-level moderator. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(7),
772–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000308
Kirkpatrick, J.D., & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
ATD Press.
Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and social issues in the information age. Springer.
Kniffin, K. M., Narayanan, J., Anseel, F., Antonakis, J., Ashford, S. P., Bakker, A. B.,
Bamberger, P., Bapuji, H., Bhave, D. P., Choi, V. K., Creary, S. J., Demerouti, E., Flynn,
F. J., Gelfand, M. J., Greer, L. L., Johns, G., Kesebir, S., Klein, P. G., Lee, S. Y., . . .
Vugt, M. V. (2021). COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for
future research and action. The American Psychologist, 76(1), 63–77.
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
Kossek, E. E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T., & Hammer, L. B. (2011). Workplace social support and
work-family conflict: A meta‐analysis clarifying the influence of general and work–
family‐specific supervisor and organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 289–
313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01211.x
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kump, B., Moskaliuk, J., Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2015). Cognitive foundations of
organizational learning: Re-introducing the distinction between declarative and non-
declarative knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1489.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01489
267

Laitinen, K., & Valo, M. (2018). Meanings of communication technology in virtual team
meetings: Framing technology-related interaction. International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 111, 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.10.012
Langfred, C. W. (2000). The paradox of self‐management: Individual and group autonomy in
work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(5), 563–585.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1379(200008)21:5<563::AID-JOB31>3.0.CO;2-H
Langley, K. (2021, August 8). Record pace for corporate earnings keeps stocks buoyant: Share of
firms beating analyst expectations is set for best showing ever, quelling worries for now
about Covid-19 variants, stretched valuations. The Wall Street Journal.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/record-pace-for-corporate-earnings-keeps-stocks-buoyant-
11628415002
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three
dimensions of job burnout. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 123–133.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.2.123
Leiter, M. P., Frank, E., & Matheson, T. J. (2009). Demands, values, and burnout: Relevance for
physicians. Canadian Family Physician, 55(12), 1224–1225.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1999). Six areas of worklife: A model of the organizational context
of burnout. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 21(4), 472–489.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2003). Areas of worklife: A structured approach to organizational
predictors of job burnout. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Emotional and
physiological processes and positive intervention strategies (pp. 91–134). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
268

Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2017). Motivation, competence, and job burnout. In A. J. Elliott, C.
S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation: Theory and
application (2nd ed., pp. 370–384). The Guilford Press.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2018). Interventions to prevent and alleviate burnout. In C. Cooper
(Ed.), Current issues in work and organizational psychology (pp. 32–50). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429468339-3
LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge
stressor–hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships
among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764–775.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.18803921
Leslie, L. M., Manchester, C. F., Park, T., & Mehng, S. A. (2012). Flexible work practices: A
source of career premiums or penalties? Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1407–
1428. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0651
Lewis, L. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication.
John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated., https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340372
Liao, C. (2017). Leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel perspective. Human Resource
Management Review, 27(4), 648–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.010
Liao, E. Y., Lau, V. P., Hui, R. T., & Kong, K. H. (2019). A resource-based perspective on
work-family conflict: Meta-analytical findings. Career Development International, 24(1),
37–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-12-2017-0236
Lippert, H., & Dulewicz, V. (2018). A profile of high-performing global virtual teams. Team
Performance Management, 24(3/4), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-09-2016-
0040
269

Llorens, S., Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W., & Salanova, M. (2006). Testing the robustness of the
job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(3), 378–
391. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.13.3.378
Locke, L. F., Silverman, S. J., & Spirduso, W. W. (2010). Reading and understanding research.
Sage Publications.
Loi, R., Chan, K. W., & Lam, L. W. (2014). Leader-member exchange, organizational
identification, and job satisfaction: A social identity perspective. Journal of Occupational
and Organizational Psychology, 87(1), 42–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12028
Lu, C., Du, D., Xu, X., & Zhang, R. (2017). Revisiting the relationship between job demands and
job performance: The effects of job security and traditionality. Journal of Occupational
and Organizational Psychology, 90(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12158
Lu, L. (2015). Building trust and cohesion in virtual teams: The developmental approach.
Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(1), 55–72.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-11-2014-0068
Lyttelton, Z., Zang, E., & Musick, K. (2022). Telecommuting and gender inequalities in parents’
paid and unpaid work before and during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 84(1), 230–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12810
Madhav, K. C., Sherchand, S. P., & Sherchan, S. (2017). Association between screen time and
depression among US adults. Preventive Medicine Reports, 8, 67–71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.08.005
Mahmoud, A. B., Fuxman, L., Mohr, I., Reisel, W. D., & Grigoriou, N. (2021). “We aren’t your
reincarnation!” workplace motivation across X, Y and Z generations. International
Journal of Manpower, 42(1), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-09-2019-0448
270

Maier, C., Laumer, S., & Eckhardt, A. (2015). Information technology as daily stressor: Pinning
down the causes of burnout. Journal of Business Economics, 85(4), 349–387.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-014-0759-8
Major, D. A., & Litano, M. L. (2016). The importance of organizational leadership in managing
work and family. In M. L. Litaano, D. A. Major, T. D. Allen, & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The
Oxford handbook of work and family (pp. 242–254). Oxford University Press.
Makarius, E. E., & Larson, B. Z. (2017). Changing the perspective of virtual work: Building
virtual intelligence at the individual level. The Academy of Management Perspectives,
31(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2014.0120
Mäkikangas, A., Feldt, T., Kinnunen, U., & Mauno, S. (2013). Does Personality Matter? A
review of individual differences in occupational well-being. In A. B. Bakker (Ed.),
Advances in Positive Organizational Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 107–143). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2046-410X(2013)0000001008
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading virtual teams. The Academy of
Management Perspectives, 21(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2007.24286164
Malloy, C. (2011). Moving beyond data: Practitioner-led inquiry fosters change. Phi Delta
Kappa International, 6(4), 1–20.
Manca, C., Grijalvo, M., Palacios, M., & Kaulio, M. (2018). Collaborative workplaces for
innovation in service companies: Barriers and enablers for supporting new ways of
working. Service Business, 12(3), 525–550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-017-0359-0
Mann, S., & Holdsworth, L. (2003). The psychological impact of teleworking: Stress, emotions
and health. New Technology, Work and Employment, 18(3), 196–211.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-005X.00121
271

Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., & Salas, E. (2017). Communication in virtual teams: A
conceptual framework and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review,
27(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.005
Marsh, K., & Musson, G. (2008). Men at work and at home: Managing emotion in telework.
Gender, Work and Organization, 15(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
0432.2007.00353.x
Martin, B. H., & MacDonnell, R. (2012). Is telework effective for organizations? A meta-
analysis of empirical research on perceptions of telework and organizational outcomes.
Management Research Review, 35(7), 602–616.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01409171211238820
Maruyama, T., & Tietze, S. (2012). From anxiety to assurance: Concerns and outcomes of
telework. Personnel Review, 41(4), 450–469.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481211229375
Maslach, C. (1998). A multidimensional theory of burnout. Theories of Organizational Stress,
68(85), 16.
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 2(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). The Maslach burnout inventory-test manual.
Mind Garden, Inc.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008a). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.93.3.498
272

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008b). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause
personal stress and what to do about it. John Wiley & Sons.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and
its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry: Official Journal of the World
Psychiatric Association, 15(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20311
Maslach, C., Leiter, M. P., & Jackson, S. E. (2012). Making a significant difference with burnout
interventions: Researcher and practitioner collaboration. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 33(2), 296–300. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.784
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
Masluk, B., Gascón Santos, S., Albesa Cartagena, A., Asensio Martinez, A., Peck, E., & Leiter,
M. P. (2018). “Areas of Worklife scale” (AWS) short version (Spanish): A confirmatory
factor analysis based on a secondary school teacher sample. Journal of Occupational
Medicine and Toxicology, 13(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-018-0202-0
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McClure, P. K. (2018). “You’re fired,” says the robot: The rise of automation in the workplace,
technophobes, and fears of unemployment. Social Science Computer Review, 36(2), 139–
156. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317698637
McCrudden, M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing.
Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-
9010-7
273

McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not,
and how to tell the difference. Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483328591
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Wiley.
Messenger, J., Vargas Llave, O., Gschwind, L., Boehmer, S., Vermeylen, G., & Wilkens, M.
(2017). Working anytime, anywhere: The effects on the world of work. Eurofound
Publications.
Messenger, J. C., & Gschwind, L. (2016). Three generations of telework: New ICTs and the
(r)evolution from home office to virtual office. New Technology, Work and Employment,
31(3), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12073
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress.
Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. Sage publications.
Molino, M., Ingusci, E., Signore, F., Manuti, A., Giancaspro, M. L., Russo, V., Zito, M., &
Cortese, C. G. (2020). Wellbeing costs of technology use during Covid-19 remote
working: An investigation using the Italian translation of the technostress creators scale.
Sustainability, 12(15), 5911. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155911
Mone, E. M., & London, M. (2018). Employee engagement through effective performance
management: A practical guide for managers. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315626529
Montano, D., Reeske, A., Franke, F., & Hüffmeier, J. (2017). Leadership, followers’ mental
health and job performance in organizations: A comprehensive meta‐analysis from an
274

occupational health perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(3), 327–350.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2124
Morgan, D. (2014). Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. SAGE Publications, Inc.,
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544304533
Morrison-Smith, S., & Ruiz, J. (2020). Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: A literature
review. SN Applied Sciences, 2(6), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2801-5
Mudrak, J., Zabrodska, K., Kveton, P., Jelinek, M., Blatny, M., Solcova, I., & Machovcova, K.
(2018). Occupational well-being among university faculty: A job demands-resources
model. Research in Higher Education, 59(3), 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-
017-9467-x
Murphy, M., & Skillen, P. (2015). The politics of time on the frontline: Street level bureaucracy,
professional judgment, and public accountability. International Journal of Public
Administration, 38(9), 632–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.952823
Nesheim, T., Olsen, K. M., & Sandvik, A. M. (2017). Never walk alone: Achieving work
performance through networking ability and autonomy. Employee Relations, 39(2), 240–
253. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-09-2016-0185
Ng, C. F. (2010). Teleworker’s home office: An extension of corporate office? Facilities,
28(3/4), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771011023113
Nikpour, A. (2017). The impact of organizational culture on organizational performance: The
mediating role of employee’s organizational commitment. International Journal of
Organizational Leadership, 6(1), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2017.60432
275

Nilles, J. M. (1975). Telecommunications and organizational decentralization. IRE Transactions
on Communications Systems, 23(10), 1142–1147.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TCOM.1975.1092687
Nilles, J. M. (1994). Making telecommuting happen: A guide for telemanagers and
telecommuters. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Northouse, P. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage.
Odden, A., & Picus, L. O. (2011). Improving teaching and learning when budgets are tight. Phi
Delta Kappan, 93(1), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109300107
Oettinger, G. S. (2011). The incidence and wage consequences of home-based work in the
United States, 1980-2000. The Journal of Human Resources, 46(2), 237–260.
https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.46.2.237
Ojala, S., Nätti, J., & Anttila, T. (2014). Informal overtime at home instead of telework: Increase
in negative work-family interface. The International Journal of Sociology and Social
Policy, 34(1/2), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-03-2013-0037
Olsen, J. P. (2014). Accountability and ambiguity. In M. A. P. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, &, T.
Schillemans (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 106-123). Oxford
University Press.
Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2019). Leaders’ impact on organizational change: Bridging theoretical
and methodological chasms. The Academy of Management Annals, 13(1), 272–307.
https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0138
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Good jobs for all in a
changing world of work: The OECD jobs strategy. OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264308817-
276

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Productivity gains from
teleworking in the post COVID-19 era: How can public policies make it happen? OECD
Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19). https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-
responses/productivity-gains-from-teleworking-in-the-post-covid-19-era-how-can-public-
policies-make-it-happen-a5d52e99/
Orhan, M. A., Rijsman, J. B., & van Dijk, G. M. (2016). Invisible, therefore isolated:
Comparative effects of team virtuality with task virtuality on workplace isolation and
work outcomes. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 32(2), 109–122.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2016.02.002
Osanloo, A., & Grant, C. (2016). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical
framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house.”
Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 7.
Palumbo, R. (2020). Let me go to the office! An investigation into the side effects of working
from home on work-life balance. International Journal of Public Sector Management,
33(6-7), 771–790. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-06-2020-0150
Palumbo, R., Manna, R., & Cavallone, M. (2020). Beware of side effects on quality!
Investigating the implications of home working on work-life balance in educational
services. The TQM Journal, 33(4), 915–929. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-05-2020-0120
Panteli, N., Yalabik, Z. Y., & Rapti, A. (2019). Fostering work engagement in geographically-
dispersed and asynchronous virtual teams. Information Technology & People, 32(1), 2–
17. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-04-2017-0133
Parker, K., Horowitz, J. M., & Minkin, R. (2022). COVID-19 pandemic continues to reshape
work in America. Pew Research Center.
277

Parker, S. K., Knight, C., & Keller, A. (2020). Remote managers are having trust issues. Harvard
Business Review, 30, 6–20.
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice (4th ed.). Sage.
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (Part 2 of 3) (REL 2016-160). Institute of
Education Sciences. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/
Perlow, L. A. (2012). Sleeping with your smartphone: How to break the 24/7 habit and change
the way you work. Harvard Business Press.
Perry, R.P. & Hamm, J.M. (2017). An attribution perspective on competence and motivation:
Theory and treatment interventions. In A. Elliot, C. Dweck, & D. Yeager (Eds.),
Handbook of Competence and Motivation (2nd ed., pp. 251-271). Guilford Press
Peters, P., Poutsma, E., Van der Heijden, B., Bakker, A. B., & Bruijn, T. D. (2014). Enjoying
new ways to work: An HRM‐process approach to study flow. Human Resource
Management, 53(2), 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21588
Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., Peeters, M. C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Hetland, J. (2012). Crafting a job
on a daily basis: Contextual correlates and the link to work engagement. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 33(8), 1120–1141. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1783
Pew Research Center. (2020). How the coronavirus has – and hasn’t – changed the way
Americans work: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/12/09/how-the-
coronavirus-outbreak-has-and-hasnt-changed-the-way-americans-work/
278

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-
hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and
withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438–
454. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438
Prasad, K., Vaidya, R. W., & Mangipudi, M. R. (2020). Effect of occupational stress and remote
working on psychological well-being of employees: An empirical analysis during covid-
19 pandemic concerning information technology industry in Hyderabad. Indian Journal
of Commerce and Management Studies, 11(2), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.18843/ijcms/v11i2/01
Pyrko, I., Dörfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: What makes Communities of
Practice work? Human Relations, 70(4), 389–409.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716661040
Qiu, F., & Dauth, T. (2022). Virtual work intensity, job satisfaction, and the mediating role of
work-family balance: A study of employees in Germany and China. German Journal of
Human Resource Management, 36(1), 77–111.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002221998227
Raghuram, S., Sharon Hill, N., Gibbs, J. L., & Maruping, L. M. (2019). Virtual work: Bridging
research clusters. The Academy of Management Annals, 13(1), 308-341.
https://https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0020
279

Richardson, J., & McKenna, S. (2014). Reordering spatial and social relations: A case study of
professional and managerial flexworkers. British Journal of Management, 25(4), 724–
736. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12017
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2018). Designing quality survey questions. Sage publications.
Romzek, B. S., & Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the
Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47, 227–238.
https://doi.org/10.2307/975901
Rosen, B., Furst, S., & Blackburn, R. (2006). Training for virtual teams: An investigation of
current practices and future needs. Human Resource Management, 45(2), 229–247.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20106
Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and
family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 655–684.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3094827
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Sage.
Rudolph, C. W., & Baltes, B. B. (2017). Age and health jointly moderate the influence of
flexible work arrangements on work engagement: Evidence from two empirical studies.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(1), 40–58.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040147
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College Press.
Sako, M. (2021). From remote work to working from anywhere. Communications of the ACM,
64(4), 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3451223
280

Saks, K., Ilves, H., & Noppel, A. (2021). The impact of procedural knowledge on the formation
of declarative knowledge: How accomplishing activities designed for developing learning
skills impacts teachers’ knowledge of learning skills. Education Sciences, 11(10), 598.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100598
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (6th ed.). SAGE.
Sánchez, A. M., Pérez, M. P., de Luis Carnicer, P., & Jiménez, M. J. V. (2007). Teleworking and
workplace flexibility: A study of impact on firm performance. Personnel Review, 36(1),
42–64. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710716713
Sarbu, M. (2018). The role of telecommuting for work-family conflict among German
employees. Research in Transportation Economics, 70, 37–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2018.07.009
Sardeshmukh, S. R., Sharma, D., & Golden, T. D. (2012). Impact of telework on exhaustion and
job engagement: A job demands and job resources model. New Technology, Work and
Employment, 27(3), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00284.x
Saunders, M.N.K., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A., and Bristow, A. (2019). Understanding research
philosophy and approaches to theory development. In M.N.K Saunders, P. Lewis, & A.
Thornhill (Eds), Research Methods for Business Students (8
th
edition, pp. 128-
171). Pearson Education.
Scharp, Y. S., Breevaart, K., & Bakker, A. B. (2021). Using playful work design to deal with
hindrance job demands: A quantitative diary study. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 26(3), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000277
Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). What is engagement? In C. Truss, K. Alfes, R. Delbridge, A. Shantz, &
E. Soane (Eds.), Employee engagement in theory and practice (pp. 29–49). Routledge.
281

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship
with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing
clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A
handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). Taylor and Francis Group.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and
resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893–917. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.595
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout
and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 33(5), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033005003
Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2019). An ultra-short
measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European
Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-
5759/a000430
Schein, P. A., & Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley.
Schepers, J., Jong, A., Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2011). Fields of gold: Perceived efficacy in
virtual teams of field service employees. Journal of Service Research, 14(3), 372–389.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511412354
Schneider, B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Creating a climate and culture for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(96)90010-8
282

Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. R., & Pintrich, P. R. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications (4th ed.). Pearson Higher Ed.
Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan
(Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (2nd ed., pp. 10–26). Academic.,
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Searle, K. (2017). Sociocultural theory. In K. Peppler (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of out-of-
school learning (Vol. 1, pp. 728–732). SAGE Publications, Inc.,
https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781483385198.n279
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7–23.
Sharit, J., Czaja, S. J., Hernandez, M. A., & Nair, S. N. (2009). The employability of older
workers as teleworkers: An appraisal of issues and an empirical study. Human Factors
and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 19(5), 457–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20138
Shirom, A., & Melamed, S. (2005). Does burnout affect physical health? A review of the
evidence. In A. S. G. Antoniou & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Research companion to
organizational health psychology (pp. 599–622). Edward Elgar Publishing.,
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845423308.00049
Shuck, B., Osam, K., Zigarmi, D., & Nimon, K. (2017). Definitional and conceptual muddling:
Identifying the positionality of employee engagement and defining the construct. Human
Resource Development Review, 16(3), 263–293.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484317720622
Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 1(1), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.27
283

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.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415589101
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(7),
2649–2668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00196-6
Spreitzer, G. M., Cameron, L., & Garrett, L. (2017). Alternative work arrangements: Two
images of the new world of work. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 473–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-
032516-113332
Stahl, A. (2020, September 1). Work-from-home burnout: Causes and cures. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleystahl/2020/09/01/work-from-home-burnout-causes-
and-cures/?sh=741a055bb881
Steidle, A., González-Morales, M. G., Hoppe, A., Michel, A., & O’shea, D. (2017). Energizing
respites from work: A randomized controlled study on respite interventions. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 650–662.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1348348
Sue, V. M., & Ritter, L. A. (2012). Conducting online surveys. Sage.
Sullivan, C. (2012). Remote working and work-life balance. In N. Reilly, M. Sirgy, & C.
Gorman (Eds.), Work and quality of life (pp. 275–290). Springer.,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4059-4_15
284

Tadić, M., Bakker, A. B., & Oerlemans, W. G. (2015). Challenge versus hindrance job demands
and well‐being: A diary study on the moderating role of job resources. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(4), 702–725.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12094
Tavares, A. I. (2017). Telework and health effects review. International Journal of Healthcare,
3(2), 30. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijh.v3n2p30
ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Bakker, A. B., Hetland, J., & Keulemans, L. (2012). Do new ways of
working foster work engagement? Psicothema, 24(1), 113–120.
ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Ter Hoeven, C. L., Bakker, A. B., & Peper, B. (2011). Breaking through
the loss cycle of burnout: The role of motivation. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 84(2), 268–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-
8325.2011.02019.x
Tetlock, P. E., Vieider, F. M., Patil, S. V., & Grant, A. M. (2013). Accountability and ideology:
When left looks right and right looks left. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 122(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.007
Thulin, E., Vilhelmson, B., & Johansson, M. (2019). New telework, time pressure, and time use
control in everyday life. Sustainability, 11(11), 3067. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113067
Timms, C., Brough, P., O’Driscoll, M., Kalliath, T., Siu, O. L., Sit, C., & Lo, D. (2015). Flexible
work arrangements, work engagement, turnover intentions and psychological health. Asia
Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 53(1), 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-
7941.12030
285

Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2015). Job crafting and job performance: A longitudinal
study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(6), 914–928.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.969245
Troup, C., & Rose, J. (2012). Working from home: Do formal or informal telework arrangements
provide better work–family outcomes? Community Work & Family, 15(4), 471–486.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2012.724220
Tuckey, M. R., Bakker, A. B., & Dollard, M. F. (2012). Empowering leaders optimize working
conditions for engagement: A multilevel study. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 17(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025942
Turesky, E., Smith, C. D., & Turesky, T. K. (2020). A call to action for virtual team leaders:
Practitioner perspectives on trust, conflict and the need for organizational support.
Organizational Management Journal, 17(4/5), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/OMJ-09-
2019-0798
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical
synthesis and integrative framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 89–104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.009
Van den Heuvel, M., Demerouti, E., & Peeters, M. C. (2015). The job crafting intervention:
Effects on job resources, self‐efficacy, and affective well‐being. Journal of Occupational
and Organizational Psychology, 88(3), 511-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12128
Van der Lippe, T., & Lippényi, Z. (2020). Beyond formal access: Organizational context,
working from home, and work-family conflict of men and women in European
workplaces. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 383–402.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1993-1
286

Van Wingerden, J., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2017). Fostering employee well-being via a job
crafting intervention. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100, 164–174.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.03.008
van Zoonen, W., Sivunen, A., Blomqvist, K., Olsson, T., Ropponen, A., Henttonen, K., &
Vartiainen, M. (2021). Factors influencing adjustment to remote work: Employees’ initial
responses to the covid-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 18(13), 6966. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18136966
Venkataramani, S. (2021, April 26). Watch out for 3 challenges driving remote work fatigue.
Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/hr-should-watch-out-for-3-
challenges-driving-remote-work-fatigue
Vogt, K., Hakanen, J. J., Brauchli, R., Jenny, G. J., & Bauer, G. F. (2016). The consequences of
job crafting: A three-wave study. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 25(3), 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2015.1072170
Vyas, L., & Butakhieo, N. (2021). The impact of working from home during COVID-19 on work
and life domains: An exploratory study on Hong Kong. Policy Design and Practice, 4(1),
59–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2020.1863560
Wang, W., Albert, L., & Sun, Q. (2020). Employee isolation and telecommuter organizational
commitment. Employee Relations, 42(3), 609–625. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-06-2019-
0246
Waters, C. N., Ling, E. P., Chu, A. H., Ng, S. H., Chia, A., Lim, Y. W., & Müller-
Riemenschneider, F. (2016). Assessing and understanding sedentary behaviour in office-
based working adults: A mixed-method approach. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 360–370.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3023-z
287

Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement (ED481972).
ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED481972
Weber, E., Krehl, E., & Büttgen, M. (2022). The digital transformation leadership framework:
Conceptual and empirical insights into leadership roles in technology‐driven business
environments. Journal of Leadership Studies, 16(1), 6–22.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21810
Weiner, B. (2005). Motivation from an attribution perspective and the social psychology of
perceived competence. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence
and motivation (1st ed., pp. 73–84). The Guilford Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A
guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press.
Wheatley, D. (2012). Work-life balance, travel-to-work, and the dual career household.
Personnel Review, 41(6), 813–831. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481211263764
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Wilmot, E. G., Edwardson, C. L., Achana, F. A., Davies, M. J., Gorely, T., Gray, L. J., Khunti,
K., Yates, T., & Biddle, S. J. (2012). Sedentary time in adults and the association with
diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Diabetologia, 55(11), 2895–2905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-012-2677-z
Wöhrmann, A. M., & Ebner, C. (2021). Understanding the bright side and the dark side of
telework: An empirical analysis of working conditions and psychosomatic health
288

complaints. New Technology, Work and Employment, 36(3), 348–370.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12208
World Health Organization. (2019). Burn out an “occupational phenomenon”: International
classification of diseases. https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/burn-out/en/
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active
crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179–201.
https://doi.org/10.2307/259118
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of
personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress
Management, 14(2), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement
and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 183–200.
https://doi.org/10.1348/096317908X285633
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Dollard, M. F., Demerouti, E., Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W.,
& Schreurs, P. J. G. (2007). When do job demands particularly predict burnout? The
moderating role of job resources. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(8), 766–786.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710837714
Yang, Y., Shin, J. C., Li, D., & An, R. (2017). Sedentary behavior and sleep problems: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine,
24(4), 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-016-9609-0
289

Zafari, S., Hartner-Tiefenthaler, M., & Koeszegi, S. T. (2019). Flexible work and work-related
outcomes: The role of perceived organizational alignment. Management Review, 30(1),
63–92. https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-2019-1-63
Zak, P. (2017). Trust factor: The science of creating high-performance companies. Amacom.
Zapf, D., Semmer, N.K., Johnson, S. (2013). Qualitative job demands. In Peeters, de Jonge, J., &
Taris, T. W. (Eds.), An Introduction to Contemporary Work Psychology (pp. 144-168).
John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
Zheng, C., Molineux, J., Mirshekary, S., & Scarparo, S. (2015). Developing individual and
organisational work-life balance strategies to improve employee health and wellbeing.
Employee Relations, 37(3), 354–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-10-2013-0142
Zimmerman, B. J., Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2017). The role of self-efficacy and
related beliefs in self-regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliott, C. S.
Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation: Theory and
application (2nd ed., pp. 41–50). The Guilford Press.

290

Appendix A: Pre-Interview Emails
Dear Dr., Ms., or Mr. ___________
My name is Stephen Blake, and I am a doctorate student at the University of Southern
California. I am conducting research on management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee
burnout. My goal as a student practitioner is to provide insight into our field as to how we might
be able to collaborate to overcome some of the challenges we are facing. Ultimately it is my
hope that this information will benefit your organization and all individuals and organizations
navigating the recent wide-scale phenomenon of virtual work. I assure you that information
acquired from you during this study will remain anonymous, as will the organization.
I have received IRB approval and am in the stage of my dissertation where I am gathering
data. I am conducting interviews with your organization’s management team. All participant and
organizational information will be completely confidential. While I know how busy you are, it
would mean the world to me if you would consider giving me 45 minutes of your time. I will
share the findings of the study with you. It would be my hope that some of these findings could
be of professional value to you.
I would like to schedule 45 minutes with you in the next week at a time and date that is
most convenient to you. Please feel free to reply to this email with some dates and times that
work best. I have also included a link to Calendly in case it is easier for you to use this method to
schedule the 45-minute block of time to be interviewed: Calendly/Stephen Blake. Thank you
very much for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Stephen Blake
Doctoral Candidate
USC Rossier School of Education

291

Dear Dr., Ms., or Mr. ___________
Thank you very much for agreeing to participate in my research study concerning the
topic of management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. You should have
received a Zoom link when you registered for an interview. In case you do not have it, your
Zoom link is zoom.us/stephenblake. As a reminder, your identity will be known only to me, and
I am conducting this study for my doctoral dissertation at the University of Southern California. I
am attaching a pdf file to this email regarding the formal notice of participant rights and the
protocol surrounding how the information you provide will be used and protected. Please reach
out to me if you have any questions about this.
Thank you so very much for taking time out of your schedule to assist me with this
research, and I look forward to our conversation on September 15, 2022.
Best regards,
Stephen Blake
Doctoral Candidate
USC Rossier School of Education

292

Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy Ste 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90089
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: Management Preconditions to Mitigate Virtual Employee Burnout
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Stephen Blake, Doctoral Candidate
FACULTY ADVISOR: Dr. Adrian J. Donato

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and skill,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary for managers to achieve management
preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. I hope to learn what literature-based needs
for virtual employee burnout management preconditions are validated in your organization and
leverage the validated needs and assets to inform an implementation and evaluation plan for
managers. You are invited as a participant because of your specific role within your organization,
which fits the defined research population of the study.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You are asked to participate in a Zoom meeting to be interviewed about the research topic. The
interview is expected to last no more than [insert duration of time]. All interaction for you and
your organization is confidential and anonymous. Neither you nor your organization will be
named or alluded to in a manner that would provide identification.
While it is the desire of the researcher to record the conversation for subsequent confidential and
anonymous transcription so that your responses can be accurately analyzed, such recording is
purely voluntary on your part and is not a condition for participation. The researcher will take
notes as an alternative during the interview as needed.
There is no ‘prework’ necessary for the interview, and it will be held at a time that is to your
convenience and with respect to your schedule and responsibilities.

293

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the findings of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Audio recordings, if made, will not have any direct reference to the full name or organization of
the participant and will be used solely for the purpose of analyzing the transcript for relevant
content. The recordings will remain in the sole possession of the research team and will be
destroyed no later than a year from completion and final approval of the study. The study is
expected to be fully completed by September 30, 2022. For this study, the research team is the
researcher and the chair of the researcher’s dissertation committee.
Audio recordings, if made, will not be started until the preliminary and identifying remarks of
the participant, and their organization, are concluded. The researcher will refer to the participant
by an arbitrary identification to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. As a part of the research
study, the recordings will be transcribed by a bonded academic paper transcription company. If a
participant desires, a copy of that transcript will be provided for review, editing, of declination of
participation.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Stephen Blake: blakes@usc.edu, 240-
508-9993, or Dr. Adrian J. Donato: adonato@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

294

Appendix C: KMO Survey Protocol
KMO influence Survey questions
Knowledge
ACPO managers need to understand the
relationships between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. (K-C)
Four level Likert (strongly disagree–strongly
agree)
I understand the triadic relationship between
virtual work, engagement, and burnout.
I understand how the benefits of virtual work can
positively impact work engagement.
I understand how the challenges of virtual work
can increase burnout.
I understand how engagement and burnout are
negatively related (more engagement/less
burnout; more burnout/less engagement).

ACPO managers need to know how to
build trust with virtual team members
(K-P1)
Multiple choice
Please select the eight management behaviors that
when performed simultaneously, most
effectively build trust with team members.
a. Lead by example
b. Recognize excellent performance
c. Design difficult but achievable challenges
d. Protect them from unwarranted criticism
e. Give them freedom to regulate how to do
their work
f. Be objective and minimize emotions
g. Enable employees to craft elements of
their role
h. Share information broadly
i. Give clear direction
j. Intentionally build relationships
k. Invest in whole-person growth
l. Listen more than you speak
m. Be vulnerable
n. Solicit their feedback
ACPO managers need to know how to
coach their virtual team members to excel
in a virtual context (K-P2)
Please select the four management behaviors that
when performed simultaneously, most
effectively coach virtual team members to excel
in a virtual context.
a. Help them with time management
295

KMO influence Survey questions
b. Acknowledge when they are doing a
good job
c. Share your own weaknesses
d. Share reactions to their performance as
personal reflections, not statements of
fact
e. Make discussions about their wins your
highest priority
f. Explain what they need to do to
improve work-life balance
g. Hold them accountable to office
policies
h. Explore solutions with them you know
they will feel confident about.
ACPO managers need to configure
personal virtual employee burnout
mitigation best practices that best help
them to mitigate their own virtual
employee burnout (K-M1)
Text box for open-ended response
Please reflect and share how have you gone about
configuring a set of best practices to mitigate
your own burnout?

If you recognize in the future that you are feeling
burned out, how will you go about
reconfiguring your best practices?
ACPO managers need to configure best-
practice virtual employee burnout
mitigation organizational strategies that
align with their organization (K-M2)
Text box for open-ended response
Please reflect and share how you go about
configuring a set of best-practice organizational
strategies to mitigate burnout amongst
employees?
If you recognize in the future that there is a
burnout problem within the organization, how
will you go about reconfiguring best-practice
organizational strategies to deal with the
problem?
Motivation
ACPO managers need to value the
usefulness of management virtual
Four level Likert (strongly disagree–strongly
agree) on all remaining questions
296

KMO influence Survey questions
employee burnout mitigation efforts for
employee well-being and performance.
(M-UV)
My efforts to get educated and resourced on the
benefits and challenges of virtual work will be
useful for my direct reports’ performance.
My efforts to get educated and resourced on the
benefits and challenges of virtual work will be
useful for my direct reports’ well-being.
My efforts to get educated and resourced on
burnout syndrome will be useful for my direct
reports’ performance
My efforts to get educated and resourced on
burnout syndrome will be useful for my direct
reports’ well-being.
My efforts to get educated and resourced on
virtual employee burnout will be useful for the
entire staff’s performance and well-being.
ACPO managers need to have confidence
they can meet management
preconditions to mitigate virtual
employee burnout. (M-SE)
I am confident in my ability to manage virtual
employees.
I am confident in my management team’s ability
to collectively manage virtual staff.
ACPO managers need to believe they are
responsible for meeting the
management preconditions they can
influence. (M-A)
I am responsible for managing my direct reports’
virtual employee burnout.
I am responsible for coaching my direct reports on
virtual work best practices.
Even though I am their manager, there are some
aspects of my direct reports’ virtual employee
burnout that I am not responsible for.
Organizational
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified
management approach to mitigating
virtual employee burnout. (O-CM)

My organization currently values a comprehensive
and unified management approach to mitigating
virtual employee burnout.
In my organization, each manager deals with
employees facing virtual burnout challenges in
their own way.
In my organization, the managers often discuss
with each other how we are doing with
managing virtual staff burnout.
Managers need training to mitigate virtual
employee burnout. (O-CS1)

In my organization, managers receive training on
the causes and outcomes of burnout syndrome.
297

KMO influence Survey questions
In my organization, managers receive training on
best practices to mitigate virtual employee
burnout.
In my organization, managers receive training on
how to use technology to mitigate virtual
employee burnout.
Managers need clear policies and
procedures to facilitate their
management of virtual employee
burnout. (O-CS2).

My organization has clear and sufficient policies
and procedures for managing virtual workers.
My organization has incorporated employees’
virtual work behaviors into its formal
performance management process.
In my organization, managers are regularly
evaluated and coached on how they manage
virtual employees.
My organization has equity-based policies that
acknowledge differences in work-from-home
demands amongst our virtual staff (parents,
caregivers, staff with disabilities, etc.).

298

Appendix D: KMO Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me and participating in my dissertation study. I have
deep respect for the work ACPO does, and I appreciate the time you have set aside today to meet
with me. The interview should last approximately 45 minutes. Does that time commitment still
work for you?
Before we get started, I wanted to provide you with an overview of what we will be
talking about today and answer any questions you might have about participating. As I shared in
the information sheet, my study is investigating management preconditions for mitigating virtual
employee burnout. As you know, ACPO’s pivot from a co-located office to employees working
remotely is a microcosm of a growing global phenomenon. I cannot study every organization in
depth, but thanks to the ACPO management team agreeing to participate in my study, I can do a
thorough study of this phenomenon at ACPO. The insights gained in this study will be one of the
first post-pandemic contributions to academic literature on the topic of management
preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. To that end, my research design includes
interviewing the ACPO management team to unpack assumptions, opinions, thoughts,
perceptions, experiences, and beliefs related to managing virtual employee burnout. I am the
principal investigator for this study, and I am working with a faculty advisor and doctoral
committee at the University of Southern California.
Do you have any questions about the purpose of the study itself?
Do you have any follow-up questions from the information sheet?
If you have questions about your rights while taking part in this study, or you have
concerns or suggestions, and you want to talk to someone other than me about the study, you can
299

reach out to the USC Institutional Review Board using the provided contact information. I have
provided their phone number, email, and the reference number for this study.
The last couple of things that I would like to cover involve the logistics of the interview
process.
Everything we discuss today will be confidential, and your anonymity will be protected
with the use of pseudonyms or numerical identifiers such as Manager 1. The name of the
organization will also be anonymized and rid of identifiers. The transcripts will not be published,
and the audio files will be deleted upon transcription. All those measures are taken to ensure
your anonymity.
Lastly, regarding recording and transcription, I will be relying on Zoom to transcribe the
conversation.
Do I have your permission to record the interview?
I may take some notes on spontaneous thoughts or insights during our interview. Are you
fine with that?
Do you have any other questions before we begin the interview?
If at any time you wish to comment off the record, please let me know by stating you
want to comment off the record, and I will pause the recording. Your participation is completely
voluntary, and I am very grateful. You may skip questions or end the interview at any time. May
I have your permission to get started?
I am now beginning the recording. This interview between the principal investigator of
the study and a study participant from the study’s relevant stakeholder group is taking place on.

300

Table D1
Interview Protocol
KMO influence Interview questions
Opening questions
Please describe your role in the organization
Can you please share with me what your responsibilities as a manager include?
What does success as a manager look like to you?
Knowledge
ACPO managers need to
understand the relationships
between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. (K-
C)
What is your understanding of the relationship between
engagement and burnout?
From your perspective, please discuss any components of
virtual work that you think could impact employees’
sense of burnout.
What components of virtual work, if any, do you think
could increase employee engagement?

ACPO managers need to know
how to build trust with virtual
team members (K-P1)
There are best practices for building employee trust,
including recognition, having clear expectations, sharing
information, and investing in employees’ growth. Please
share what you know about the best combination of
manager behaviors to build employee trust.
ACPO managers need to know
how to coach their virtual team
members to excel in a virtual
context (K-P2)
There are best practices for providing employee feedback,
including acknowledging positive outcomes, sharing
your personal reactions, prioritizing positive outcome
discussions, and framing solutions employees will feel
confident about. Please share what you know about how
to best coach your employees to excel in a virtual
context.
ACPO managers need to
configure personal virtual
employee burnout mitigation
best practices that best help
them to mitigate their own
virtual employee burnout (K-
M1)
Effective virtual managers often reflect on configuring a
set of best practices to mitigate their own burnout. How
do you go about configuring a set of virtual burnout
mitigation best practices?
Probe: If you recognize in the future that you are feeling
burned out, how will you go about reconfiguring your
best practices?
301

KMO influence Interview questions
ACPO managers need to
configure best-practice virtual
employee burnout mitigation
organizational strategies that
align with their organization
(K-M2)
Effective virtual managers often reflect on configuring a
set of best-practice organizational strategies to mitigate
burnout among employees. How do you go about
configuring a set of best-practice strategies to mitigate
burnout amongst employees?
Probe: If you recognize in the future that there is a burnout
problem within the organization, how will you go about
reconfiguring best-practice strategies to deal with the
problem?
Motivation
ACPO managers need to value
the usefulness of management
virtual employee burnout
mitigation efforts for employee
well-being and performance.
(M-UV)
Managers who appreciate the usefulness of virtual
employee burnout mitigation efforts are more motivated
to address the problem. How, if at all, do you think
management’s virtual burnout mitigation efforts are
useful for employees’ performance?
Probe: How about usefulness for employees’ well-being?
ACPO managers need to have
confidence they can meet
management preconditions to
mitigate virtual employee
burnout. (M-SE)
The more confident you are in your ability to manage
virtual employees, the more engaged and effective you
will be. Please talk a little about your confidence with
managing virtual employees.
Probe: How about your confidence in the management
team to manage virtual employees?
ACPO managers need to believe
they are responsible for
meeting the management
preconditions they can
influence. (M-A)
Effective virtual managers believe they are responsible for
getting educated and resourced to help virtual
employees navigate virtual work. How, if at all, do you
believe you are responsible for getting educated and
resourced to manage virtual employee burnout?
Organizational
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified
management approach to
mitigating virtual employee
burnout. (O-CM)
Can you tell me a little about the management team’s
collective approach to mitigating virtual employee
burnout?
Can you share about general conversations within the
management team, if any, about helping staff with
virtual employee burnout?
302

KMO influence Interview questions
Managers need training to
mitigate virtual employee
burnout. (O-CS1)
Please tell me about any training you have received from
your organization on managing virtual employee
burnout for your employees.
Probe: How about training for managing your
own virtual employee burnout?
Managers need clear policies and
procedures to facilitate their
management of virtual
employee burnout. (O-CS2).

Please tell me a little about your organization’s policies
and procedures for managing virtual workers.
Probe: How clear do you think they are?
Probe: How sufficient?
How has your organization incorporated employees’
virtual work behaviors into its formal performance
management process?
As a manager, how are you evaluated and coached on
managing virtual employees?
Tell me a little about your organization’s equity-based
policies that attempt to acknowledge differences in
work-from-home demands amongst virtual staff
(parents, caregivers, staff with disabilities, etc.).
Probe: If you don’t have any policies, have
there been conversations around these
differences?

303

Appendix E: KMO Document Analysis Protocol
The analyzed documents aligned with the study ’s conceptual framework investigating
ACPO managers ’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for achieving the stakeholder
goal related to meeting management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout. The
requested documents included ACPO ’s organizational statements (vision, mission, values,
goals), annual employee survey report, virtual work policies and procedures, and staff
performance management reports. The documents were scanned, reviewed, and coded to
correspond with the assumed ACPO managers ’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational
needs.
Qualitative data sets from document analyses were analyzed using a multi-step process
involving data review, coding, and reporting. Document analyses were performed prior to the
interviews; however, they were also revisited after the interviews to assess explanatory or
divergent information. This process was undertaken in accord with investigating the a priori
assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for managers to meet their
stakeholder goal. This process was consistent with the conceptual framework and research
questions.
The protocol outlines the matching of KMO needs with documents and research
questions.

304

Table E1
Document Analysis Protocol
KMO influence Document analysis
Knowledge
ACPO managers need to understand the
relationships between virtual work,
engagement, and burnout. (K-C)
Organizational statements
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to know how to build
trust with virtual team members. (K-P1)
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to know how to coach
their virtual team members to excel in a
virtual context (K-P2)
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to configure personal
virtual employee burnout mitigation best
practices that best help them to mitigate
their own virtual employee burnout (K-
M1)
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to configure best-
practice virtual employee burnout
mitigation organizational strategies that
align with their organization (K-M2)
Organizational statements
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
Motivation
ACPO managers need to value the
usefulness of management virtual
employee burnout mitigation efforts for
employee well-being and performance.
(M-UV)
Organizational statements
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to have confidence
they can meet management preconditions
to mitigate virtual employee burnout. (M-
SE)
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
ACPO managers need to believe they are
responsible for meeting the management
preconditions they can influence. (M-A)
Organizational statements
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
305

KMO influence Document analysis
Organizational
The organization needs to value a
comprehensive and unified management
approach to mitigating virtual employee
burnout (O-CM).
Organizational statements
Annual employee survey report
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates
Managers need training to mitigate virtual
employee burnout (O-CS1).
Annual employee survey report
Performance management templates
Managers need clear policies and procedures
to facilitate their management of virtual
employee burnout (O-CS2).
Organizational statements
Virtual work policies and procedures
Performance management templates

306

Appendix F: Virtual Management Training Module Evaluation Form
The following questions will be asked to evaluate the virtual management training
module. The questions address Levels 1 and 2 of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) model.
Level 1
Engagement: Did you find this module engaging? How so or not so?
Relevance: Did you find this module relevant to your managerial task of virtual employee
burnout mitigation? How so or not so?
Customer satisfaction: Overall, were you satisfied with the content and structure of this
module?
Level 2
Declarative knowledge: What are your top three knowledge takeaways from this module?
Procedural knowledge: What new skills from this module do you look forward to
practicing?
Attitude: What value do you think the content of this module brings to your role and to
the office?
Confidence: Do you feel confident applying what you learned from this module? How so
or not so?
Commitment: How will you demonstrate commitment to executing what you learned in
this module?

307

Appendix G: Director of Operations VMT Evaluation Form
Evaluation of:
Circle One: Synchronous Session with All Managers or Manager 1:1
Level 1
Engagement: What have you been finding most interesting in the VMT?
Relevance: What have you been able to apply already?
Customer satisfaction: How have you liked the training so far?
Customer satisfaction: Do you have any improvement suggestions?
Level 2
Declarative knowledge: In your own words, how would you summarize the content of the
most recent module?
Procedural knowledge: Can you walk me through the steps you will take in executing
these new skills?
Attitude: Do you think the training is worthwhile for equipping you to manage your
staff’s virtual employee burnout?
Confidence: How confident are you to apply what you learned in training?
Commitment: Are there any concerns preventing you from committing to the VMT’s
directives?

308

Appendix H: VMT Post-program Evaluation Form
This form should be used for evaluation Immediately after the program.
Level 1
Engagement: What did you find most interesting about the VMT program?
Relevance: What aspect of the program equipped you the most?
Customer satisfaction: Overall, how satisfied were you with the VMT program?
Customer satisfaction: What features of the program did you enjoy the most?
Level 2
Declarative knowledge: What are your key takeaways from the VMT program regarding
managing virtual employee burnout?
Procedural knowledge: Can you walk me through the steps you will take in executing
these new skills?
Attitude: Do you think the VMT was worthwhile for equipping you to manage your
staff’s virtual employee burnout?
Confidence: After completing the VMT program, do you feel confident in your ability to
manage your staff’s virtual employee burnout?
Commitment: What outcomes are you expecting to see from your efforts?

309

Appendix I: VMT Post-program Delayed Evaluation Form
This evaluation should be used a month after the program and each subsequent quarter
for a year.
Level 1
Engagement: How have you been prioritizing virtual employee burnout mitigation since
completing the VMT?
Relevance: What from the VMT has been the most relevant to managing your staff’s virtual
employee burnout?
Customer satisfaction: Overall, how satisfied are you with the VMT now that the virtual office-
wide employee burnout mitigation campaign is up and running?
Level 2
Declarative knowledge: What VMT content have you kept coming back to?
Procedural knowledge: What skills have been the most influential for leading your staff’s
virtual employee burnout mitigation?
Attitude: Do you feel equipped to continue fulfilling this management role?
Confidence: Are there any areas of managing your staff’s virtual employee burnout that
you feel unsure about addressing?
Commitment: Do you have any concerns related to the continued execution of this
management component of mitigating virtual employee burnout?
Level 3
Would you say you have been able to successfully apply what you learned in the VMT?
What critical behaviors have you performed consistently? What has helped you to
successfully practice these behaviors?
310

Is there anything you are doing that you think the other managers could learn from?
Describe any challenges you are facing as you attempt to apply your training.
How can the director of operations and/or purchasing agent help you to overcome these
challenges?
Level 4
What positive organizational results have you seen from applying what you learned
during VMT?
Do you believe your direct reports and skip levels are more engaged in the virtual
employee burnout mitigation campaign because you have been applying what you learned in the
VMT?
Do you believe your direct reports and skip levels are more satisfied with ACPO’s virtual
employee burnout mitigation efforts because you have been applying what you learned in the
VMT?
How has your application of the training contributed to the sustainability of the ACPO’s
virtual employee burnout mitigation efforts?
How has the VMT improved organizational performance?
Using a sliding scale of 1-10, rate the degree to which you think a third-party observer
would say you are meeting the management preconditions for reducing virtual employee burnout
by 100%.

311

Appendix J: Data Reporting Dashboard Examples

312

313

DASHBOARD MANAGER PROFILE EXAMPLE

314

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

From a privilege to an option: hybrid work schedule: a gap analysis

PDF

Inclusionary practices of leaders in a biotechnology company: a gap analysis innovation study

PDF

Recruiting police diversity

PDF

Exploring inequitable experiences of remote employees of color in biotechnology organizations in the United States who face less favorable remote work conditions…

PDF

Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world

PDF

Best practices for increasing Black technical managers in the executive space

PDF

The declining enrollment in a California community college during the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

Employee engagement in a post-COVID era: the mediating role of basic psychological need satisfaction in remote and hybrid work environments

PDF

Role understanding as a pillar of employee engagement: an evaluation gap analysis

PDF

Millennial workforce retention program: an explanatory study

PDF

Navigating race, gender, and responsibility: a gap analysis of the underrepresentation of Black women in foreign service leadership positions

PDF

Information technology architects’ shift to remote work: an exploration of collaboration challenges

PDF

Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study

PDF

Nonprofit middle manager perceptions of organizational efficacy: a gap analysis

PDF

Participating in your own survival: a gap analysis study of the implementation of active shooter preparedness programs in mid-to-large size organizations

PDF

Mentoring as a capability development tool to increase gender balance on leadership teams: an innovation study

PDF

Executive succession planning: a study of employee competency development

PDF

Addressing physician burnout: is there a relationship with leadership behaviors?

PDF

Addressing employee retention in the technology industry: improving access to corporate social responsibility programs

PDF

Collaboration, capacity, and communication: Leaders’ perceptions of innovative work behavior across hybrid and remote work environments

Asset Metadata

Creator Blake, Stephen (author)

Core Title Management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 01/26/2023

Defense Date 11/08/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Burnout,distributed workforce,employee engagement,employee experience,future of work,hybrid work,OAI-PMH Harvest,remote work,telework,virtual work,work engagement

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Donato, Adrian (committee chair), Filback, Robert (committee member), Foulk, Susanne (committee member)

Creator Email blakes@usc.edu,sgpblake@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112719084

Unique identifier UC112719084

Identifier etd-BlakeSteph-11439.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-BlakeSteph-11439

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Blake, Stephen

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230126-usctheses-batch-1004 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu