doi: 10.56294/sctconf2024908

Category: Finance, Business, Management, Economics and Accounting

ORIGINAL

Effectiveness of hybrid workplace and its sustainable impact of determinants of organizational commitment among it companies

Eficacia del puesto de trabajo híbrido y su impacto sostenible en los determinantes del compromiso organizativo de las empresas de TI

B. Vidya Sri¹ *, S. Vasantha¹ *

¹School of Management Studies, Vels Institute of Science, Technology and Advanced Studies (VISTAS), Pallavaram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Cite as: Vidya Sri B, Vasantha S. Effectiveness of hybrid workplace and its sustainable impact of determinants of organizational commitment among it companies. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias. 2024; 3:908. https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024908

Submitted: 08-02-2024                   Revised: 26-04-2024                   Accepted: 12-06-2024                 Published: 13-06-2024

Editor: Dr. William Castillo-González

ABSTRACT

Organizational structures have shifted, and new methods of operation have been brought to light, by the recent health crisis. Although many businesses have already started working remotely again, things will not be going back to how they were before the crisis. This is even though remote work seemed to be a vital tool for reducing contamination risks in the workplace. Hybrid work structures, where employees work remotely and in person, will become increasingly common across various IT sectors. Hence, the present study examine the effectiveness of the Hybrid workplace on the organizational commitment in the selected IT companies. The methodology applied here is a stratified sampling method for collecting data from employees working in IT companies around 210 employees participated in the survey. Two factors have been observed for the study one is the effectiveness of the hybrid workplace and the second one is determinants of organizational commitment. The SEM model has been applied to examine the significant impact of is effectiveness of the hybrid workplace on determinants of organizational commitment. Results show there is a significant impact of the effectiveness of the hybrid workplace on determinants of organizational commitment. Thus, it is suggested that for better organizational commitment among employees of IT companies, organizations should develop and propagate a hybrid working model.

Keywords: Contamination; Commitment; Hybrid Working and Workplace.

RESUMEN

La reciente crisis sanitaria ha modificado las estructuras organizativas y ha sacado a la luz nuevos métodos de funcionamiento. Aunque muchas empresas ya han vuelto a trabajar a distancia, las cosas no volverán a ser como antes de la crisis. Y eso que el trabajo a distancia parecía una herramienta vital para reducir los riesgos de contaminación en el lugar de trabajo. Las estructuras de trabajo híbridas, en las que los empleados trabajan a distancia y en persona, serán cada vez más habituales en diversos sectores de las TI. De ahí que el presente estudio examine la eficacia del puesto de trabajo híbrido sobre el compromiso organizativo en las empresas de TI seleccionadas. La metodología aplicada en este caso es un método de muestreo estratificado para recopilar datos de los empleados que trabajan en empresas de TI, alrededor de 210 empleados participaron en la encuesta. Para el estudio se han tenido en cuenta dos factores: la eficacia del puesto de trabajo híbrido y los factores determinantes del compromiso organizativo. Se ha aplicado el modelo SEM para examinar el impacto significativo de la eficacia del puesto de trabajo híbrido en los determinantes del compromiso organizativo. Los resultados muestran que existe un impacto significativo de la eficacia del puesto de trabajo híbrido en los determinantes del compromiso organizativo. Así pues, se sugiere que para mejorar el compromiso organizativo entre los empleados de las empresas de TI, las organizaciones deberían desarrollar y propagar un modelo de trabajo híbrido.

Palabras clave: Contaminación; Compromiso; Trabajo Híbrido y Lugar de Trabajo.

INTRODUCTION

Employees may select the most comfortable location for them to work depending on their preferences and duties when using a hybrid workplace strategy, which eventually boosts output and job satisfaction. A hybrid workplace may also assist businesses in attracting and retaining top talent by providing a more adaptable and flexible work environment. Employers profit from cultivating a more efficient, robust, and resilient workforce.

The unexpected shift to remote work in 2020 was necessary, but now organizations have an opportunity to be more deliberate in their work strategies. According to Forbes, “The goal of the hybrid workspace is to maximize productivity without sacrificing too much of our employees’ time or their ability to manage their workdays”. In the future workplace, employees will effortlessly blend into hybrid teams, irrespective of their geographical location. The process begins by establishing robust communication and planning tactics, dismantling barriers, and fostering a cohesive work environment. HR directors need adequate systems and tools to improve the output, effectiveness, and sustainability of their teams working from home in addition to a broad range of intelligent technologies to help with employee recruitment, orientation, and retention. Employee expectations may be fulfilled and financial objectives can be achieved easily in modern workplaces with online services, robust safety services, and enhanced communication capabilities.

Hybrid work will connect the remote and onsite workplaces, allowing employees to collaborate seamlessly. Implementing technology in the office, including remote communication tools and video conferencing equipment, will facilitate this. Determine if you require new tools or if you can utilize current ones in innovative ways.⁽¹⁾ Implement communication protocols across the firm and motivate team leaders to establish precise guidelines for their staff. For instance, you can utilize an asynchronous communication approach to cater to employees in various time zones. Establishing office schedules to control workflow gives workers flexibility. There are several methods to tackle this. An example of a hybrid work paradigm could be implementing a hybrid at-will policy, allowing employees to select the days they work in the office. You might opt for a hybrid manager-scheduling model in which managers have authority over schedules and decide which days their employees come into the workplace.

Workplace experience is the most crucial factor for the success of your mixed work arrangement. Although your employees may not be physically present at the workplace daily, it is crucial to make sure that each day they are there is meaningful and deliberate. Having more people present on-site enhances the experience for individuals attending face-to-face meetings and collaboration.⁽²⁾ To create an exceptional workplace environment, one must concentrate on three key components: space, technology, and people. Considering the synergy of each component will enhance your hybrid work model. For instance, enhancing the functionality of places in your office can enhance the overall workplace experience by providing employees with a variety of areas to select from. The objective of the study is as follows.

1. To determine the underlying factors of Effectiveness of Hybrid Work Place and Determinants of Organizational Commitment

2. To examine the impact of the Effectiveness of a Hybrid Work Place on Determinants of Organizational Commitment.

3. To suggest means for enhancing organizational commitment among employees of IT companies in Chennai city

Theoratical framework/literature review

In a hybrid workplace, workers are usually more invested since they have more flexibility and liberty. A more productive, healthy, and consistent staff is good for business. The hybrid workplace does not, however, provide a silver bullet or easy solution to every problem that may arise on the job. Strategic use of current HR technology that fosters connection, collaboration, and employee engagement is essential for today’s hybrid workplaces. Thanks to advancements in HR technology, data can be collected, managed, and analyzed from any team, no matter their location, which is simplifying the transition to hybrid work. From collaboration tools to cloud technologies, technology can facilitate employee onboarding, upskilling, and reskilling, and, when utilized properly, it also provides employees with access to all the resources they need throughout their employee journey. Hence there is a need for a Hybrid workplace for better organizational commitment among employees.

The present study examines the effectiveness of the Hybrid Working model on Organizational commitment in selected IT companies in Chennai city. The perception of the IT employees is observed with 20 aspects on the Effectiveness of the Hybrid workplace and 15 aspects on Determinants of Organizational Commitment. Four different categories of assessment were recognized: emotion-based, theoretical, formal, and financial. The authors suggest the concept of sequencing to represent the careful pursuit of excellence in all four valuation registers. Sequencing is the continuous action of separating conflicting registers and then reuniting them. At the operational level it is used to prevent conflicts and allow multiple, often opposing methods of producing good results to coexist and blend.⁽³⁾

The functional foundation is to create these environments in two different manners. It is beneficial to create online and offline solutions as a unified one. It also offers a tool for problem solving processes and designing initiatives, with a focus on culture.⁽⁴⁾ Hybridizing must be comprehended about an intricate task at hand. One key point is that complexity can be managed by either intense focus or dividing it into compartments. The intense focus might result in a disciplined approach that enables effective action, or it can lead to a heated and disputed situation marked by lethargy.⁽⁵⁾

Many service firms are continuing to adopt hybrid workplaces despite the relaxation of COVID-19 rules. Furthermore, when working remotely, some workers might find it difficult to establish a work-life balance and to keep work and personal life apart. Employers must give workers the tools and assistance they need to successfully negotiate the difficulties of a diverse work environment.⁽⁶⁾

Organizations are using various strategies in the post-pandemic workplace, while executives are encountering obstacles while transitioning back to the regular work setting. We offer a strategy that empowers team leaders and members to control their work environment in a hybrid setting, addressing the future employment.⁽⁷⁾ Utilizing the ADDIE Model and the Kirkpatrick Model for training and development inside the hybrid work model. The technological improvements of current times have needed and enabled these new approaches.⁽⁸⁾

The disparity between employees’ desired level of remote work and the reality of their jobs significantly influenced their likelihood of considering resignation. Making workers return to the workplace might result in the loss of valuable staff members.⁽⁹⁾ Additional characteristics were managerial support, workplace inclusivity, and the interplay of personality types. They were also crucial in creating an appealing work environment, with Extraversion-Introversion being a significant factor.⁽¹⁰⁾

METHOD

Primary data were gathered from workers at IT organizations in selected parts of Chennai city. These IT organizations are established in the west and south part of Chennai city. The researcher used a stratified random sampling method for data collection by segregating established IT organizations into two zones, namely the west zone and south zones and collected around 250 responses, after scrutiny of the sample based on the errors and extreme values the 210 samples were taken for analysis. The researcher has used both the nominal scale and the Likert scale for measuring the effectiveness of the hybrid workplace and determinants of organizational commitment after giving weightage of 5,4,3,2 and 1 (strongly agree to strongly disagree).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The collected data are subjected to the statistical technique and interpretation of the results; hence the collected data has been statistically tested by applying Multivariate Statistics to examine the hidden correlation among the variables, and the impact between the variables. The results of the findings are shown in the table 1.

Table 1. Factorisation of effectiveness of hybrid work place
Effectiveness of Hybrid Work Place	Factor Loading	Mean value	Std. Deviation	Communa lities	Eigen value	Variance explained	Factor Name
Provides more flexibility to employees	0,847	4,040	0,898	0,740	4,393	21,964 %	Flexibility and Accessibility Factor(FAF)
Access to a wider talent pool	0,753	4,120	0,849	0,649
Enhances collaboration	0,740	4,010	0,883	0,653
Less commuting time	0,733	4,000	0,789	0,665
Improves employee work life balance	0,729	4,030	0,812	0,616
Provides employees more opportunities to upskill	0,653	3,900	0,958	0,771
Improved employer-employee trust	0,812	4,430	0,662	0,671	4,307	21,534 %	Trustworthiness and Prioritisation Factor (TPF)
Employee prioritization	0,682	4,230	0,792	0,686
Meetings or collaborative work with colleagues	0,667	4,170	0,776	0,634
Reduced real estate costs	0,639	4,140	0,748	0,599
Job Satisfaction	0,629	4,160	0,751	0,548
Connection to the mission or purpose of the organization	0,621	4,130	0,837	0,644
More development opportunities	0,597	4,040	0,846	0,674
Promotes mental wellbeing	0,418	4,000	0,824	0,412
High levels of adaptability in the presence of change	0,792	4,110	0,893	0,762	4,063	20,315 %	Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor (ASF)
Overworking and burnout	0,694	4,040	0,794	0,700
Employee happiness	0,651	4,100	0,823	0,685
Co-workers committed to quality work	0,571	4,130	0,787	0,563
Increases employee productivity	0,549	4,160	0,802	0,514
Reduces operating costs	0,546	4,020	0,869	0,577

Table 1 shows the factorization of twenty Effectiveness of Hybrid Work Place (EHWP) variables, the 20 EHWP. It has been extracted into 3 main factors which account for 63,81 % of the variance in EHWP. The mean value and standard deviation value show strong measures of mean because to standard deviation is far lower than the mean standards. The highest mean value is for “Improved employer-employee trust” which shows hybrid workplace enhance the trust between employees and employers.

The KMO value of 0,885, the Chi-square value of 3094,006, and the P value of 0,000 show that factor analysis may be used to extract the latent controlling variables from the set of 20 EHWP variables. The values of commonalities range from 0,412 to 0,771, suggesting that components may be extracted from the set of 20 EHWP variables using factor analysis.

The first factor 1 accounts for 21,964 % of the variance with an Eigen value of 4,393 and it consists of six variables namely Provides more flexibility to employees, Access to a wider talent pool, enhances collaboration, less commuting time, improves employee work-life balance and Provides employees more opportunities to upskill based correlation among the variable and relative position of the variables and been termed as Flexibility and Accessibility Factor (FAF).

The second Factor 2 accounts for 21,530 % of variance with Eigen value of 4,307 consisting of 8 variables namely Improved employer-employee trust, Employee prioritization, Meetings or collaborative work with colleagues, reduced real estate costs, Job Satisfaction, Connection to the mission or purpose of the organization, more development opportunities and promotes mental wellbeing based on the relative correlation and relative position called as Trustworthiness and Prioritisation Factor (TPF).

The factor 3 explains 20,32 % of the variance with Eigen value of 4,063 and consists of 6 variables namely High levels of adaptability in the presence of change, Overworking, and burnout, Employee happiness, Co-worker’s commitment to quality work, increased employee productivity and reduces operating costs based on the relative correlation and position of the variables is called as Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor (ASF).

Table 2. Factorisation of Determinants of Organisational Commitment
Determinants of Organisational Commitment	Factor Loading	Mean value	Std. Deviation	Communa lities	Eigen value	Variance explained	Factor Name
Offer incentives	0,830	4,220	0,806	0,775	4,931	32,872 %	Recognition and Work Delegation Factor (RWDF)
Employees should be appreciated for what they are doing good	0,830	4,310	0,855	0,720
Efficiently delegate tasks	0,810	4,170	0,810	0,683
New opportunities	0,806	4,230	0,804	0,738
Give employees more responsibilities	0,798	4,120	0,866	0,764
Creating a safe space for people to register their concerns about issues	0,749	4,170	0,830	0,633
Pairing employees with tasks suitable for their skills	0,721	4,170	0,941	0,670	4,525	30,166 %	Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor (AAF)
Communicate clear goals and expectation to the employees	0,793	4,230	0,761	0,651
Developing trust among employees as well as leadership	0,732	4,150	0,733	0,564
Encourage innovation	0,723	4,230	0,737	0,618
transparent and encourage open communication	0,714	4,170	0,835	0,600
Employees should be provided with constructive feedback whenever needed	0,713	4,220	0,751	0,555
Create a strong teamwork culture	0,675	4,150	0,761	0,498
Foster a positive work culture	0,669	4,220	0,808	0,585
Maintain work ethics	0,578	4,110	0,849	0,500

Table 2 shows the factorization of fifteen Determinants of Organisational Commitment (DOC) variables, the 15 DOC variables have been extracted into two dominant factors which account for 63,038 % of the variance in DOC. The value of mean and standard deviation shows strong measures of mean values as the value of standard deviation is one-third of its mean values. The highest mean value is observed for “Employees should be appreciated for what they are doing good” which reveals employees at the workplace should be rewarded and appreciated for the work done by them, which enhances their moral value.

The KMO value of 0,875 with a Chi-square value of 2205,253, and a P value of 0,000 indicates factor analysis can be applied to 15 DOC variables to extract the latent dominant factors. The communalities values lie between 0,498 to 0,775, indicating that factor analysis can be used to extract factors out of 15 DOC variables.

The first factor 1 accounts for 32,870 % of variance with Eigen value of 4,931 and it consists of six variables namely Offer incentives, Employees should be appreciated for what they are doing good, Efficiently delegate tasks, New opportunities, Giving employees more responsibilities and Creating a safe space for people to register their concerns about issues based on correlation among the variable and relative position of the variables it has been termed as Recognition and Work Delegation Factor (RWDF).

The second Factor 2 account for 30,17 % of the variance with Eigen value of 4,525 and it consists of nine variables namely Pairing employees with tasks suitable for their skills, communicating clear goals and expectations to the employees, Developing trust among employees as well as leadership, Encourage innovation transparent and encourage open communication, Employees should be provided with constructive feedback whenever needed, Create a strong teamwork culture, Foster a positive work culture and Maintain work ethics based on correlation among the variables and relative position of the variables it has been termed as Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor (AAF).

Sem Model for Impact of Effectiveness of Hybrid Workplace on Determinants of Organizational Commitment

SEM has been applied to examine the causal relationship using a combined approach of statistical data and qualitative assumptions. SEM is a relatively good multivariate statistical method in terms of lower limitation in the adoption of the number of variables in the constructed model compared to other statistical methods. The Error in the measurement model can be easily determined and can be eradicated using SEM. It is also a reliable method for assessing and estimating the measurement error in a constructed model. SEM incorporates both latent and observed variables. The relationship between observed variables such as the Flexibility and Accessibility Factor (FAF), Trustworthiness and Prioritization Factor (TPF), Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor (ASF), Recognition and Work Delegation Factor (RWDF), and Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor (AAF). The latent variables in the model are the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace and Determinants of Organizational Commitment. Hence, the relationship between the variables has been observed using the Structural Equation Model Shown in figure 1.

Figure 1. SEM Model for impact of effectiveness of hybrid workplace on determinants of organizational commitment

Table 3. Regression Weight for Impact of Effectiveness of Hybrid Work Place on Determinants of Organizational Commitment
Measured Variables		Latent Variables	Un- Standardized Co-efficient	S.E.	Standardized Co-efficient	T value	P-value
DOC	<---	EHWP	0,788	0,092	0,881	8,587	<0,000**
ASF	<---	EHWP	1,000		0,904	-	-
TPF	<---	EHWP	1,215	0,065	0,893	18,767	<0,000**
FAF	<---	EHWP	0,829	0,07	0,687	11,803	<0,000**
RWDF	<---	DOC	1,000		0,626	-	-
AAF	<---	DOC	1,482	0,153	0,996	9,693	<0,000**
CMIN/DF:1,079, GFI:0,992, AGFI:0,969, NFI:0,994, CFI:1,000 RMSEA: 0,019, P<0,604

Table 3 reveals the Coefficient value for the impact of the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace on Determinants of Organizational Commitment is significant and positive holding other variables as consistent. The estimated positive sign reveals that the Effectiveness of a Hybrid Work Place would enhance with the enhancement of three factors namely, FAF, TPF, and ASF.

The Coefficient value of 0,881 indicates the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace has a direct impact on Organizational Commitment. Organizational Commitment would enhance by 0,881 units for every one-unit change in the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace. The developed model perfectly fits all dimensions as the value of GFI, AGFI, NFI, and CFI is under the threshold limit, and the value of RMSEA is less than 0,080. The CMIN.DF the value of 1,079 shows, there is a significant relationship between EHWP and DOC.

Three major factors, derived from a set of 20 EHWP variables, contribute to 63,81 % of the variance in EHWP. The first factor 1 accounts for 21,964 % of the variance with an Eigen value of 4,393 and it consists of six variables namely Provides more flexibility to employees, Access to a wider talent pool, enhances collaboration, less commuting time, improves employee work-life balance and Provides employees more opportunities to upskill based correlation among the variable and relative position of the variables (Flexibility and Accessibility Factor). The Factor 2 account for 21,530 % of variance with Eigen value of 4,307 and it consist of 8 variables namely Improved employer-employee trust, Employee prioritization, Meetings or collaborative work with colleagues, reduced real estate costs, Job Satisfaction, Connection to the mission or purpose of the organization, more development opportunities and promotes mental wellbeing based on the relative correlation and relative position (Trustworthiness and Prioritisation Factor). The factor 3 explains 20,32 % of the variance with Eigen value of 4,063 and it consists of 6 variables namely High levels of adaptability in the presence of change, Overworking, and burnout, Employee happiness, Co-workers committed to quality work, increased employee productivity and reduces operating costs based on the relative correlation and position of the variables (Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor).

Two dominating factors that were derived from 15 DOC variables account for 63,038 % of the variance in DOC. The first factor 1 accounts for 32,870 % of variance with Eigen value of 4,931 and consists of six variables namely Offer incentives, Employees should be appreciated for what they are doing good, efficiently delegate tasks, new opportunities, giving employees more responsibilities and creating a safe space for people to register their concerns about issues based on correlation among the variable and relative position of the variables (Recognition and Work Delegation Factor). The second Factor 2 account for 30,17 % of the variance with Eigen value of 4,525 and it consists of nine variables namely Pairing employees with tasks suitable for their skills, communicating clear goals and expectations to the employees, Developing trust among employees as well as leadership, Encourage innovation transparent and encourage open communication, Employees should be provided with constructive feedback whenever needed, Create a strong teamwork culture, Foster, a positive work culture and Maintain work ethics based on the correlation among the variables and relative position of the variables (Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor).

The relationship between observed variables such as the Flexibility and Accessibility Factor (FAF), Trustworthiness and Prioritization Factor (TPF), Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor (ASF), Recognition and Work Delegation Factor (RWDF), and Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor (AAF). The latent variables in the model are the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace and Determinants of Organizational Commitment. Hence, the relationship between the variables has been observed using the Structural Equation Model. The effectiveness of a Hybrid Work Place would enhance with the enhancement of three factors, namely FAF, TPF, and ASF. The Coefficient value of 0,881 indicates the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace has a direct impact on Organizational Commitment. Organizational Commitment would enhance by 0,881 units for every one-unit change in the Effectiveness of a Hybrid workplace. The developed model perfectly fits all dimensions as the value of GFI, AGFI, NFI, and CFI is under the threshold limit, and the value of RMSEA is less than 0,080. The CMIN.DF the value of 1,079 shows, there is a significant relationship between EHWP and DOC.

CONCLUSION

In the world that follows a pandemic, hybrid employment arrangements will take root. But since no standard operating procedure exists just now, businesses will have to learn the hard way. All things considered; the change was fruitful. Despite the pandemic’s effects, some workers thrived after removing the physical barriers of the office. This disproves the long-held belief that working remotely is inefficient and doesn’t yield the same results as an office setting. The relocation of many formerly inconceivable occupations to more urban areas has been a resounding success.

Employers were concerned that output would plummet when the pandemic first started. Nonetheless, the inverse occurred. Employees who were able to work remotely actually put in more hours, which resulted in more output. An overwhelmed culture can spread throughout the hybrid workplace paradigm if it is not addressed. Investing in renovating current office space to accommodate flexible workers is a necessary step for organizations looking to migrate to a hybrid workplace. Making sure employees have access to a range of spaces where they can concentrate and get things done includes making sure there are designated locations for breaks and quiet reflection as well as adaptable meeting spaces that can be transformed into activity-based workspaces.⁽¹¹⁾ Meanwhile, businesses should equip themselves with the right software, such as HR management systems, accounting programs, invoice generators for professional operations, and more.

The predominant workplace model in the post-pandemic society will be hybrid work. There is currently no established standard operating procedure for corporations to adhere to, leading to an unavoidable reliance on trial and error. Hence, the present study tries to determine the effective usage of the hybrid working model using 20 aspects which are factorised and segregated into three factors, namely Flexibility and Accessibility Factor (FAF), Trustworthiness and Prioritisation Factor (TPF), and Adaptability and Satisfaction Factor (ASF). The determinants of Organisational Commitment have been identified using 15 aspects, which have been factorized and segregated into two dominant factors, namely Recognition and Work Delegation Factor (RWDF) and the Accumulating and Accomplishing Factor (AAF). The SEM model has been used to assess the significant impact of the effectiveness of a hybrid workplace on determinants of organizational Commitment.

REFERENCES

1. Currie G, Tuck P, Morrell K. How hybrid managers act as “canny customers” to accelerate policy reform: A case study of regulator-regulatee relationships in the UK’s tax agency. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 2015 Oct 19; 28(8): 1291-1309.

2. Malila C, Daya P, Bick G. The future of work: A hybrid work model in a public sector organisation. The Case Writing Centre, University of Cape Town, Graduate School of Business. 2023 May 9: 1-20.

3. Schrøder I, Cederberg E, Hauge AM. What is good work in a hybrid organization? On the efforts of sequencing registers of valuation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 2022 Mar 9; 35(3): 917-49.

4. Lahti M, Nenonen SP, Sutinen E. Co-working, co-learning and culture–co-creation of future tech lab in Namibia. Journal of Corporate Real Estate. 2022 Mar 3; 24(1): 40-58.

5. Kastberg G, Lagström C. Processes of hybridization and de-hybridization: organizing and the task at hand. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 2019 Jun 14; 32(3): 710-26.

6. Oppong Peprah E. Hybrid workplace: current status, positives, negatives, challenges, and team learning. The Learning Organization. 2024 Feb 13; 31(1): 88-103.

7. Detjen J, Webber SS. Leading hybrid teams in a transition to the future knowledge workplace. Strategy & Leadership. 2023 Oct 31; 51(6): 16-21.

8. Suravi S. Training and development in the hybrid workplace. The Learning Organization. 2024 Feb 13; 31(1): 48-67.

9. Hackston J. Using personality type to engage and retain remote, hybrid and office-based workers. Strategic HR Review. 2022 Sep 27; 21(6): 191-194.

10. Williams CC. From the formal/informal work dichotomy to hybrid semiformal work practices: the case of envelope wages in the European Union. International Journal of Sociology. 2009 Jul 1; 39(2): 39-59.

11. Martínez-Álvarez P, Bannan B. An exploration of hybrid spaces for place-based geomorphology with Latino bilingual children. Journal of Geoscience Education. 2014 Feb 26; 62(1): 104-117.

FINANCING

None.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

AUTHORSHIP CONTRIBUTION

Conceptualization: B. Vidya Sri, S. Vasantha.

Research: B. Vidya Sri, S. Vasantha.

Writing - original draft: B. Vidya Sri, S. Vasantha.

Writing - revision and editing: B. Vidya Sri, S. Vasantha.