Traces of Technological Well-being: Digi-uplifters and Digi-downshifters
Keywords:Health, Working Environment & Wellbeing
Digitalization adds demands to contend with technological developments for both employees and organizations. At the same time, technological changes transform work to become more intensive and hectic. This study examined determinants of technological well-being after digitized work. Technological well-being was operationalized as Digi-downshifting where decreased workload associates with job satisfaction and as Digi-uplifting where increased workload associates with job satisfaction. A subsample (N = 3321) of workers at digitalized workplaces from the Finnish Quality of Work Life Survey was used in mean comparisons and binary logistic regression analysis. Digi-uplifters emerged as the most predominant profile among categories of technological well-being and ill-being. Extensive working time with technologies and employees’ influencing opportunities at the workplace stood out as the most consistent determinants of technological well-being. Thus, Nordic countries with skilled, technologically oriented workforce and democratic working cultures have particular promise in fostering Digi-uplifting and Digidownshifting at work.
Abildgaard, J. S., and Nickelsen, N. C. M. (2013). Making materials matter: A contribution to a sociomaterial perspective on work environment, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 3(4): 63. doi: 10.19154/njwls.v3i4.3073.
Alasoini, T. (2018). Nordic working life development programs and the tricky problem of scaling-up, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 8(4). doi: 10.18291/njwls.v8i4.111929
Alfayad, Z., and Arif, L. (2017). Employee voice and job satisfaction: An application of Herzberg's two-factor theory, International Review of Management and Marketing 7(1): 150–156.
Appelbaum, E. (1990). Technology and the redesign of work in the insurance industry, In Wright, B. D. (Ed.), Women, Work, and Technology: Transformations, Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press, pp. 182–201.
Beedholm, K., Frederiksen, K., Skovsgaard Frederiksen, A.-M., and Lomborg, K. (2015). Attitudes to a robot bathtub in Danish elder care: A hermeneutic interview study, Nursing & Health Sciences 17(3): 280–286. doi: 10.1111/nhs.12184
Bernerth, J. B., Walker, H. J., and Harris, S. G. (2011). Change fatigue: Development and initial validation of a new measure, Work & Stress 25(4): 321–337. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2011.634280
Bordi, L., Okkonen, J., Mäkiniemi, J. P., and Heikkilä-Tammi, K. (2018). Communication in the digital work environment: implications for wellbeing at work, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 8(3). doi: https://tidsskrift.dk/njwls/index
Boxall P., and Macky K. (2014). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and
employee well-being, Work Employment Society 28(6): 963–984. doi: http://dx.doi.
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly Capital, New York: Free Press.
Brougham, D., and Haar, J. (2018). Smart technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and algorithms (STARA): Employees’ perceptions of our future workplace, Journal of Management and Organization 24(2): 239–257. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2016.55
Buser, T., and Peter, N. (2011). Multitasking: Productivity Effects and Gender Differences; University of Amsterdam: Technical Report (TI 2011–044/3), 2011 Contract No.: TI 2011–044/3.
Bäcklander, G., Rosengren, C., and Kaulio, M. (2021). Managing intensity in knowledge work: Self-leadership practices among Danish management consultants, Journal of Management & Organization 27(2): 342–360. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2018.64
Cavanaugh, M. A., Boswell, W. R., Roehling, M. V., and Boudreau, J. W. (2000). An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among US managers, Journal of Applied Psychology 85(1): 65.
Chesley, N. (2014). Information and communication technology use, work intensification and employee strain and stress, Work, Employment and Society 28(4): 589–610. doi: 10.1177/0950017013500112
Chowhan, J., Denton, M., Brookman, C., Davis, S., Sayin, F., and Zeytinoglu, I. (2019). Work intensification and health outcomes of health sector workers, Personnel Review 48(2): 342–359. doi: 10.1108/PR¬10¬2017¬0287
Clegg, C., and Spencer, C. (2007). A circular and dynamic model of the process of job design, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 80: 321–339.
DESI (2022). EU Digital Economy and Society Index. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/desi [Accessed 21 February 2023].
Dølvik, J. E., and Steen, J. R. (2018). The Nordic Future of Work: Drivers, Institutions, and Politics, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers.
Downes, P. E., Reeves, C. J., McCormick, B. W., Boswell, W. R., and Butts, M. M. (2020). Incorporating job demand variability into job demands theory: A meta-analysis, Journal of Management 47(6): 1630–1656. doi: 10.1177/0149206320916767
Elciyar, K. (2021). Technostress: Information overload and coping strategies, In: da Silva, E., Lígia Pomim Valentim, M. L. P. (Eds.), Role of Information Science in a Complex Society. IGI Global, pp. 239–261. doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6512-4.ch014
Esfahani, M. S., and Abbasirad, K. (2021). Managing user engagement in Virtual event platforms. ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-12). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
Farivar, F., and Richardson, J. (2021). Workplace digitalisation and work-nonwork satisfaction: The role of spillover social media, Behaviour & Information Technology 40(8): 747–758. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1723702
Franke, F. (2015). Is work intensification extra stress? Journal of Personnel Psychology 14(1): 17–27. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000120
Gajdos, A., Marchewka, M., Stroinska, E., and Trippner-Hrabi, J. (2019). Multitasking in public organizations – The case study of a Polish university. Economic and Social Development: Book of Proceedings: 67–76.
Goulding, C., and Reed, K. (2010). To downshift or not to downshift? Why people make and don’t make decisions to change their lives, In: Blyton, P., Blunsdon, B., Reed, K., Dastmalchian, A. (Eds.), Ways of Living, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 175–201. doi: 10.1057/9780230273993_8
Green, F. (2006). Demanding work: The Paradox of Job Quality in the Aﬄuent Economy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Harju, L., Hakanen, J. J., and Schaufeli, W. B. (2014). Job boredom and its correlates in 87 Finnish organizations, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 56(9): 911–918.
Janíčko, M., and Krčková, A. (2019). Work autonomy at different occupational skill levels: Recent trends in Europe, Eastern European Economics 57(3): 197–226. doi: 10.1080/00128775.2019.1566868
Jesnes, K. (2019). Employment models of platform companies in Norway: A distinctive approach? Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 9 (56). doi: https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.v9iS6.114691
Kaasinen, E., Roto, V., Hakulinen, J., Heimonen, T., Jokinen, J. P., Karvonen, H., Keskinen, T., Koskinen, H., Lu, Y., Saariluoma, P., Tokkonen, H., and Turunen, M. (2015). Defining user experience goals to guide the design of industrial systems, Behaviour & Information Technology 34(10): 976–991. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2015.1035335
Kaduk, A., Genadek, K., Kelly, E. L., and Moen, P. (2019). Involuntary vs. voluntary flexible work: Insights for scholars and stakeholders, Community, Work & Family 22(4): 412–442. doi: 10.1080/13668803.2019.1616532
Kawada, M., Shimazu, A., Tokita, M., Miyanaka, D., and Schaufeli, W. B. (2022). Validation of the Japanese version of the Dutch Boredom Scale. Journal of Occupational Health 64(1): e12354.
Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, A. (2019). Is employee technological “ill-being” missing from corporate responsibility? The Foucauldian ethics of ubiquitous IT uses in organizations, Journal of Business Ethics 160(2): 339–361. doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04202-y
Lee, D. J., and Sirgy M. J. (2019). Work-life balance in the digital workplace: The impact of schedule, In: Coetzee, M. (Ed.), Thriving in Digital Workspaces: Emerging Issues for Research and Practice, Cham: Springer, pp. 355–384.
LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., and 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.
Marsh, E., Vallejos, E. P., and Spence, A. (2022). The digital workplace and its dark side: An integrative review, Computers in Human Behavior 128. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118
Marsh, K., and Musson, G. (2008). Men at work and at home: Managing emotion in telework, Gender, Work & Organization 15(1): 31–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00353.x
Masuda, A. D., Sortheix, F. M., Beham, B., and Naidoo, L. J. (2019). Cultural value orientations and work–family conflict: The mediating role of work and family demands, Journal of Vocational Behavior 112: 294–310. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2019.04.001
Mauno, S., Kubicek, B., Minkkinen, J., and Korunka, C. (2019) Antecedents of intensified job demands: Evidence from Austria, Employee Relations 41(4): 694–707. doi: 10.1108/ER¬04¬2018-0094
Mauno, S., Kubicek, B., Feldt, T., and Minkkinen, J. (2020) Intensified job demands and job performance: Does SOC strategy use make a difference? Industrial Health 58(3): 224–237. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2019-0067
Mayne, J. (2007). Challenges and lessons in implementing results-based management, Evaluation 13(1): 87–109.
Mazzola, J. J., and Disselhorst, R. (2019) Should we be “challenging” employees? A critical review and meta¬analysis of the challenge¬ hindrance model of stress, Journal of Organizational Behavior 40: 949–961. doi: 10.1002/job.2412
Micic, L., Khamooshi, H., Raković, L., and Matković, P. (2022). Defining the digital workplace: a systematic literature review, International Journal of Strategic Management and Decision Support Systems in Strategic Management 27: 29–43.
Muller, C. (2010). Hospitality technology: A review and reflection, Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 2(1). doi: 10.1108/17554211011012568
Mustosmäki, A., Anttila, T., and Oinas, T. (2013). Engaged or not? A comparative study on factors inducing work engagement in call center and service sector work, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 3(1): 49. doi: 10.19154/njwls.v3i1.2520
OECD (2017). Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard. https://www.oecd.org/sti/oecd-science-technology-and-industry-scoreboard-20725345.htm. [Accessed 21 February 2023].
Oinas, T., Anttila, T., Mustosmäki, A., and Nätti, J. (2012). The Nordic difference: Job quality in Europe 1995-2010, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 2(4): 135.
Parent-Thirion, A., Fernández-Macías, E., Hurley, J., and Vermeylen, G. (2007). Fourth European Working Conditions Survey (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions), Luxembourg: Oﬃce for Oﬃcial Publications of the European Communities.
Parker, S. K., Van den Broeck, A., and Holman, D. (2017). Work design influences: A synthesis of multilevel factors that affect the design of jobs, Academy of Management Annals 11(1): 267–308.
Parviainen, P., and Tihinen, M. (2014). Knowledge‐related challenges and solutions in GSD, Expert Systems 31(3): 253–266. doi: 10.1111/exsy.608
Piątkowski, M. J. (2020). Expectations and challenges in the labor market in the context of Industrial Revolution 4.0. The agglomeration method-based analysis for Poland and other EU member states, Sustainability 12(13): 5437.
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., and LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology 92(2): 438.
Pärnänen, A., Sutela, H., and Mahler, S. (2005). European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The tripartite EU agency providing knowledge to assist in the development of better social, employment and work-related policies. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2005/combining-family-and-full-time-work [Accessed 17 May 2022].
Rassameethes, B., Phusavat, K., Pastuszak, Z., Hidayanto, A. N., and Majava, J. (2021). From training to learning: Transition of a workplace for industry 4.0, Human Systems Management 40(6): 777–787.
Rosa, H. (2013). Social Acceleration: A new Theory of Modernity, New York: Columbia University Press.
Rosa, H. (2003). Social acceleration: Ethical and political consequences of a desynhcronized high¬speed society, Constellations 10(1): 3–33. doi: 10.1111/1467-8675.00309
Schlesselman, L. S., Cain, J. and DiVall, M. (2020). Improving and restoring the well-being and resilience of pharmacy students during a pandemic, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 84(6). doi: doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8144
Sharma, M.K., Anand, N., Ahuja, S., Thakur, P.C., Mondal, I., Singh, P., Kohli, T., and Venkteshan, S. (2020). Digital burnout: COVID-19 lockdown mediates excessive technology use stress, World
Social Psychiatry 2(2): 171.
Sutela, H., Pärnänen, A., and Keyriläinen, M. (2019). Digiajan Työelämä—Työolotutkimuksen Tuloksia 1977–2018. In Working Life of the Digital Era—Results of the Quality of Work Life Surveys 1977–2018; Ofﬁcial Statistics of Finland; Statistics: Helsinki, Finland, 2019. (In Finnish)
Thun, S., Kamsvåg, P. F., Kløve, B., Seim, E. A., and Torvatn, H. Y. (2019). Industry 4.0: Whose revolution? The digitalization of manufacturing work processes, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies. doi: 10.18291/njwls.v9i4.117777
Turja, T. (2022). Rather sooner than later: Participatory change management associated with greater job satisfaction in healthcare, Journal of Advanced Nursing. doi: 10.1111/jan.15133
Turja, T., Krutova, O., Melin, H., Särkikoski, T., and Koistinen, P. (2022). Job well robotized! Maintaining task-diversity in technological changes, European Management Journal. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2022.08.002
Venckutė, M., Mulvik, I. B., Lucas, B., and Kampylis, P. (2020). Creativity–a transversal skill for lifelong learning. An overview of existing concepts and practices, JRC Working Papers, (JRC122016).
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., and Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, MIS Quarterly 36(1): 157–178. doi: 10.2307/41410412
Wallin, A., Pylväs, L., and Nokelainen, P. (2020). Government workers’ stories about professional development in a digitalized working life, Vocations and Learning 13(3): 439–458. doi: 10.1007/s12186-020-09248-y
Watson, D., Tregaskis, O., Gedikli, C., Vaughn, O., and Semkina, A. (2018). Well-being through learning: A systematic review of learning interventions in the workplace and their impact on well-being, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 27(2): 247–268.
Weinberg, A. (2016). When the work is not enough: The sinister stress of boredom, In: Fink, G. (Ed.) Stress: Concepts, Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior, Academic Press, pp. 195–201. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-800951-2.00023-6
Wiehler, A., Branzoli, F., Adanyeguh, I., Mochel, F., and Pessiglione, M. (2022). A neuro-metabolic account of why daylong cognitive work alters the control of economic decisions, Current Biology 32(16): 3564–3575.
Wilkesmann, M., and Wilkesmann, U. (2018). Industry 4.0–organizing routines or innovations?. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems 48(2): 238–254. doi: 10.1108/VJIKMS-04-2017-0019
Wood, J., Oh, J., Park, J., and Kim, W. (2020) The relationship between work engagement and work–life balance in organizations: A review of the empirical research. Human Resource Development Review 19(3): 240–262.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holder of this Journal is the authors and the Journal. This Journal gives Open Access with CreativeCommons license CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.
You can download all the content of the Journal and share it with others as long as you credit the authors and the journal, but you can’t change it in any way or use it commercially.
More specifically this license means that you – authors and users – may:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or form as long as you follow the license terms. The freedom to share includes parallel publishing on authors’ own website and in institutional repositories or in ResearchGate after publication in NJWLS, or if you want to reprint your article as part of publication of a PhD-thesis or a dissertation
You may share under these terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit and provide a link to the license. Appropriate credit implies that you provide the name of the creator and attribution parties, a copyright notice, a license notice, a disclaimer notice, and a link to the material. The link used should be its DOI.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. A commercial use is one primarily intended for commercial advantage or monetary compensation.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. Merely changing the format never creates a derivative.
Exceptions to the license terms may be granted
If you want to use content in the Journal in another way then described by this license, you must contact the licensor and ask for permission. Contact Bo Carstens at email@example.com. Exceptions are always given for specific purposes and specific content only.
The Journal is listed as a blue journal in Sherpa/Romeo, meaning that the author can archive post-print ((ie final draft post-refereeing) and author can archive publisher's version/PDF.
Copyright of others
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere.
All published material is archived at Roskilde University Library, Denmark, and transmitted to the Danish Royal Library in conformity with the Danish rules of legal deposit.
We do not screen articles for plagiarism. It is the responsibility of the authors to make sure they do not plagiate.