Author Archives: support

Defining a ‘Social Good’ Enterprise: Its Impact on Value Creation and Capital Accumulation

In recent years, the intersection of commercial and social value creation has gained prominence, leading to a growth in ventures that aim to address social needs alongside financial goals. A pivotal study published in the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal has shed light on this trend by categorizing social ventures into four distinct types. This classification is achieved by applying a business model perspective, which clarifies how different approaches can influence value creation and capture within these enterprises.

Lien De Cuyper, a respected figure at the University of Amsterdam, along with her esteemed colleagues Bart Clarysse from ETH Zürich and Mike Wright of Imperial College Business School, London, spearheaded the study. Their collective expertise and dedication led to the identification of three critical decisions that entrepreneurs in this space must make: defining the scope of target beneficiaries, determining the overlap between customers and beneficiaries, and deciding how to communicate the social mission through the business’s value proposition. These decisions form the foundation for identifying the four types of social business models: Social Stimulators, Social Providers, Social Producers, and Social Intermediaries.

Social Stimulators aim to increase awareness about social and environmental issues, often defining their beneficiaries broadly, with customers directly benefiting from their products or services. Social Providers target specific communities, offering products that focus on the functional benefits to these direct beneficiaries. Social Producers, on the other hand, concentrate on a group that acts both as customers and suppliers, integrating social values deeply into the sourcing process. Lastly, Social Intermediaries have a broad scope of beneficiaries but keep a clear distinction between the beneficiaries and the customers, focusing on functional product aspects to sustain their social missions financially.

The study also delves into how these business models impact the ventures’ operational and financial dynamics. For instance, Social Intermediaries typically incur higher operating costs due to their role as facilitators between different stakeholder groups. In contrast, Social Stimulators can command higher prices from customers due to the intrinsic social value of their offerings. This differentiation in business models leads to varied implications for a venture’s cost structure and revenue generation strategies.

By moving beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, De Cuyper and her team advocate for a nuanced understanding of social entrepreneurship. This structured analysis, with its practical implications, helps stakeholders identify the social enterprise they are dealing with or considering establishing. Such insights are crucial for crafting strategic decisions that effectively balance social impact with economic viability, ultimately leading to more sustainable and impactful social entrepreneurship practices.

More information: Lien De Cuyper et al, Doing good while making profits: A typology of business models for social ventures, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. DOI: 10.1002/sej.1502

Journal information: Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal Provided by Strategic Management Society

Shifting Trends in Volunteering: Adapting to Steady-State Brand Relationships in Organizations

Leave a Reply

A recent study by researchers at Emlyon Business School and HEC Montreal, soon to be published in the Journal of Marketing, is a significant contribution to understanding the evolving nature of volunteerism. This study provides critical insights into the changing dynamics of volunteer engagement, offering actionable strategies for mutual benefit. The forthcoming paper, ‘Managing Brand Relationship Plurality: Insights from the Nonprofit Sector,’ authored by Verena Gruber and Jonathan Deschênes, is a must-read for nonprofit managers seeking to adapt to the evolving landscape of volunteerism.

Volunteers are crucial to the sustainability and operations of nonprofit organisations worldwide. According to a 2021 report by United Nations Volunteers, over 850 million volunteers globally contribute to various causes. Traditionally, these volunteers were motivated by altruism and a solid cultural and personal alignment with the nonprofits they chose to support. Today, however, the relationship between volunteers and nonprofit brands has transformed. Modern volunteers often engage more casually, seeking flexibility and opportunities for personal and professional growth rather than committing long hours or forming deep affiliations with organisations.

This shift poses a significant question for nonprofits: How can they build and maintain relationships with a volunteer base whose motivations and engagement levels are changing? The study suggests that nonprofits can benefit by fostering traditional and newer volunteer relationships. Through a detailed case study of the Red Cross in Vienna, Austria, the research illustrates how organisations can adapt their volunteer management practices to cater to traditional volunteers who are deeply committed and newer ones who prefer a more flexible involvement.

The study recommends maintaining a strong material presence for traditional volunteers, who are still vital to nonprofit organisations’ core functions. This includes creating physical spaces for volunteers to meet and interact, providing training and skill-building opportunities, and using branded materials such as clothing and high-quality communication tools like exclusive magazines. These practices help strengthen the bond between the volunteers and the organisation, encouraging a deeper and more committed engagement.

In contrast, the approach to newer volunteers should be more pragmatic. These individuals prefer to volunteer when it suits their schedules and are less emotionally invested in the organisations they help. The study suggests nonprofits should respect these preferences and focus on creating a flexible engagement model that accommodates intermittent involvement. This could involve using technology, like mobile applications, to manage and activate a diverse pool of volunteers as needed.

Jonathan Deschênes notes that the research highlights essential lessons for nonprofit managers in balancing these volunteer relationships. The findings suggest that a symbiotic approach can be beneficial, where distant and non-escalating relationships are managed alongside more traditional, growth-oriented ones. This strategy helps manage volunteer resources more effectively and has broader implications for brand relationship management across both nonprofit and for-profit sectors.

Moreover, the concept of “Neither Growing nor Fading” (NGNF) relationships introduced in the study is particularly intriguing. These are relationships where volunteers only sometimes deepen their engagement over time but still contribute regularly. The researchers argue that while these relationships have been largely overlooked, they represent a significant portion of interactions in consumer-brand relationships as well.

For nonprofit managers, the study offers a roadmap for navigating the changing dynamics of volunteer engagement. The strategic recommendations, such as embracing the new volunteer logic, developing partnerships to broaden outreach, and tailoring communication strategies, are invaluable tools for adapting to the evolving landscape of volunteerism. Additionally, the study’s insights on identifying specific volunteer profiles and skillsets can help in more effectively matching volunteers to tasks, ensuring that each engagement is productive.

This comprehensive analysis not only sheds light on the changing landscape of volunteerism but also provides actionable strategies for nonprofits to adapt and thrive in this new environment. As volunteer motivations and behaviours continue to evolve, understanding and integrating these insights from the study will be key to fostering successful and sustainable volunteer relationships. The study’s relevance to the current challenges in volunteer management makes it a compelling read for nonprofit managers.

More information: Verena Gruber et al, Managing Brand Relationship Plurality: Insights From the Nonprofit Sector, Journal of Marketing. DOI: 10.1177/00222429241253193

Journal information: Journal of Marketing Provided by American Marketing Association

Modest Leaders Elevate Employees’ Position and Leadership Capabilities in the Workplace

Leave a Reply

The workplace features a wide range of leaders, from those prioritizing the needs of their team and organization to those who promote an authentic environment marked by openness, trust, and transparency. Recently, the University of South Australia highlighted the significant advantages of humble leadership within professional settings, as detailed in a study by Dr. Xiao Lin. This type of leadership has been shown to elevate employees’ workplace status by enhancing their respect and prominence while encouraging them to develop their leadership potential, thus motivating them to take charge and lead.

Humble leadership is characterized by leaders who maintain an accurate self-perception, acknowledge and appreciate the strengths and contributions of others, and are receptive to feedback, including criticism. These leaders engage in “bottom-up leadership,” which involves actively listening to employees, valuing their input, supporting their professional development, and encouraging them to initiate action. Dr. Lin, a member of UniSA’s Centre for Workplace Excellence and an expert in moral-based leadership styles, emphasizes the critical importance of understanding humble leadership in today’s complex and competitive business landscape.

Dr Lin advocates for implementing humble leadership, noting its substantial positive impact on workplace outcomes, including enhanced work engagement, proactive behaviour, well-being and resilience, and increased innovation, learning, and performance. According to Dr Lin, humble leadership elevates employees’ status, unlocks their potential and leads to a more engaged, innovative, and high-performing workplace. Additionally, it helps build a pool of influential leaders for the future, allowing organizations to maintain competitive advantages by fostering the leadership potential of their employees.

Humble leadership is effective when leaders provide ‘status cues’ reflecting humility and approachability. This could be demonstrated through a leader’s willingness to listen, learn, and collaborate with their team rather than asserting dominance or superiority. Another example of humble leadership in action is the practice of ‘role reversals,’ which allows employees to teach their leaders, empowering them to exert more influence in the workplace.

However, Dr. Lin points out that not all employees respond to humble leadership similarly, as their reactions depend on their characteristics. Employees focused on individual development, success, and competition tend to respond best to humble leadership. These individuals are driven to excel and influence their leaders, seeking to become high-status team members and stand out as exemplary employees.

Conversely, those who do not value their development or success in the workplace are less likely to benefit from humble leadership. Such employees are content to follow their leaders’ directives without striving to display their own strengths or contributions. This distinction underscores the varied effects of leadership styles across different employee demographics, highlighting the nuanced approach needed in leadership to cater to diverse employee needs.

More information: Xiaoshuang Lin et al, How do humble leaders unleash followers’ leadership potential? The roles of workplace status and individualistic orientation, Journal of Organizational Behavior. DOI: 10.1002/job.2793

Journal information: Journal of Organizational Behavior Provided by University of South Australia

Companions with Health Advantages: The Intrinsic Value of Partnership in Successfully Achieving Personal and Professional Objectives

Leave a Reply

Setting weekly targets, annual resolutions, and five-year plans often appears tantalisingly elusive. Despite our best intentions, many of us need help to persist with the goals we set for ourselves. Next time you establish a goal, consider partnering with a friend. Recent field research by Assistant Professor Rachel Gershon and published in Management Science suggests that pursuing objectives with friends could make them more attainable. Gershon, in collaboration with Cynthia Cryder from Washington University and Katy Milkman from the University of Pennsylvania, specifically explored the effects of joint gym visits and found that attending the gym with a friend, although challenging due to the need to coordinate schedules, boosted gym attendance by 35%.

“While the coordination introduced a layer of complexity, we noticed that people were more motivated and attended the gym more frequently,” Gershon remarks. “This underscores how social incentives, often underutilised, can help overcome other challenges in our path.” The study involved two groups over a ‘Gym Bonus Month’ lasting four weeks from February 1 to February 28. Each participant paired up with a friend, and each gym visit earned them a $1 Amazon gift card. One group received this incentive each time they went to the gym, regardless of their friend’s attendance, whereas the reward for the other group depended on attending together.

The findings revealed that those compensated only when attending the gym with their friends doubled their joint sessions and increased their overall gym attendance by 35%. Gershon and her team deduced that two primary benefits outweighed the logistical challenges of aligning schedules. First, individuals enjoyed their gym sessions more when social, which likely increased the frequency of future visits. Second, they felt a heightened sense of accountability when meeting a friend at the gym.

“Our research underscores two types of accountability,” Gershon notes. “People feel a sense of duty towards their friends, as they want them to benefit from the reward, but there may also be concern over their reputation should they fail to meet expectations.” Despite these advantages, Gershon and her colleagues discovered that over 80% of people, when asked, preferred not to coordinate gym visits with a friend, indicating a widespread reluctance to engage in joint activities despite the potential benefits. According to Gershon, this hesitation might be due to underestimating the motivational uplift and more robust social bonds such arrangements can foster, enhancing feelings of connectedness and community inclusion.

Additionally, the research highlighted that the social aspect of gym attendance was particularly beneficial for those who were less active initially. Among each pair, the friend who exercised less frequently before the study saw a significant increase in gym visits, suggesting that social incentives can be compelling for specific groups. Beyond the gym, these findings have broader implications for behaviour modification in various contexts. Companies looking to boost employee engagement in skills training might consider implementing joint incentives to enhance participation and strengthen workplace relationships.

Moreover, Gershon’s investigations into referral programs uncover further advantages. Many organisations incentivise referrals, such as offering a free membership month to recruit friends. This tactic not only helps to engage new customers but also boosts the motivation of current members, showcasing the crucial role of social networks in initiating and sustaining new undertakings. This role can be a catalyst, inspiring and motivating us to embrace new challenges.

More information: Rachel Gershon et al, Friends with Health Benefits: A Field Experiment, Management Science. DOI: 10.1007/s00394-023-03123-x

Journal information: Management Science Provided by University of California Berkeley Haas School of Business

How Some Abusive Managers Are Tolerated by Their Staff

Leave a Reply

Recent research suggests that employees are more inclined to overlook abusive behaviour from leaders who are perceived as high performers, often rationalizing the abuse as merely “tough love.” The study, published in the journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, involved a three-wave survey of 576 workers across various industries in the United States. These workers completed online surveys that queried them on their boss’s abusive behaviours and overall effectiveness. The results revealed that employees show less animosity towards abusive bosses if these bosses are high performers, with some employees even believing that their careers could benefit from working under a successful yet abusive leader.

Robert Lount, the lead author and management and human resources professor at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business explained that employees might find it difficult to reconcile the notion of a successful leader being abusive. As a result, they might reframe abusive behaviour as something more positive, like ‘tough love.’ For those reporting abuse, additional questions determined whether employees would label their boss as an abuser or view them as a “tough love” type of leader, described in the survey as “stern but caring,” “insensitive but nurturing,” and “rough but well-meaning.”

Findings showed that employee perceptions of their bosses’ abusive behaviour and their effectiveness influenced how they labelled their supervisors. When bosses were seen as high performers, workers were more likely to describe them as “tough love” supervisors. Conversely, when bosses were viewed as lower performers, they were more likely to be labelled as abusers. Bennett Tepper, a co-author of the study and a professor at Ohio State, suggested that employees might be looking for a silver lining, noting that while these bosses might treat their employees harshly, their intent could be to help their subordinates realize their potential.

Employees working under abusive but successful bosses reported that they didn’t like the abuse. Still, they believed it could lead to positive outcomes, such as promotions, due to their experience under a successful leader. Additionally, these employees were less likely to retaliate against high-performing abusive bosses, avoiding actions like disobedience or giving silent treatment. This dynamic of working for an abusive and successful leader was further examined in a laboratory experiment involving 168 undergraduate students, simulating an online team competition led by an MBA student.

In the lab experiment, participants received either an abusive or non-abusive message from their “team leader,” with subsequent feedback on their team’s performance influencing their evaluations of the leader. Participants who received abusive messages rated their leader as less abusive if their team performed well, suggesting that high performance could quickly reduce the likelihood of labelling a boss as abusive. Interestingly, Lount emphasized that their findings do not indicate that abusive behaviour leads to leadership success.

The study highlights how employees respond to abusive supervision when paired with success, helping to explain why some abusive bosses can maintain long careers. High performance might shield them from repercussions because their employees perceive them as merely “tough love” bosses, according to Tepper. This phenomenon illustrates how performance can sometimes overshadow and mitigate perceptions of abusive behaviour in the workplace, contributing to the complex dynamics between leaders and their subordinates.

More information: Robert B. Lount Jr. et al, “Abuser” or “Tough Love” Boss?: The moderating role of leader performance in shaping the labels employees use in response to abusive supervision, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104339

Journal information: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Provided by The Ohio State University

Reinterpreting Anxiety to Enhance Business Presentations

Leave a Reply

Recent research suggests that anxiety, when reframed, can be leveraged as a powerful tool in high-stress scenarios such as business pitches. A study spearheaded by Washington State University demonstrates that entrepreneurs who linked their pitch-related anxiety to their deep passion for their projects were rated higher by judges and more likely to receive funding recommendations.

The study, published in the Journal of Business Venturing, explored the concept of emotion reframing. This technique involves entrepreneurs recognising that their anxiety is partially driven by how much the project means to them. The research contrasts this approach with other anxiety management strategies, such as suppression or distraction, which appeared to be less effective, according to the findings.

Lily Zhu, the study’s lead author and researcher at WSU’s Carson College of Business, emphasised the potential benefits of understanding and utilising emotions constructively. “Emotions are not your enemies. They can be your friends,” Zhu remarked, suggesting that a deeper understanding of one’s emotions could transform them into catalysts for positive outcomes.

The study involved a three-part investigation into how anxiety affects entrepreneurial pitches. Initially, the researchers surveyed entrepreneurs on their anxiety management techniques before pitches, finding that most relied on distraction (49%) or physical strategies (40.8%) like deep breathing. Only a tiny fraction (12.2%) reported attempting to reframe their anxiety positively.

Further research was conducted during new venture competitions at business schools in southern California, where it was observed that judges favoured those who reframed their anxiety as an indicator of their commitment to their projects. Another experiment involved college students in a business communications class who made pitches for charitable causes. Students who linked their anxiety to their passion for the cause received higher persuasiveness ratings and were more likely to be recommended for funding.

This reframing did not eliminate anxiety; instead, it became a strategic advantage by aligning it with the entrepreneurs’ passion, thus enhancing their pitch performance. Zhu highlights that raising funds is a critical challenge for entrepreneurs, who often feel a deep psychological attachment to their ventures, viewing their ideas as extensions of themselves.

Zhu’s closing thoughts reinforce the dual nature of anxiety: “Although anxiety can be seen as debilitating or undesirable, there’s a flip side to it: if you are anxious, it is often because you really care.” This insight suggests that, if properly channelled, anxiety can significantly enhance performance by reflecting a profound commitment to the venture.

More information: Lily Yuxuan Zhu et al, Linking anxiety to passion: Emotion regulation and entrepreneurs’ pitch performance, Journal of Business Venturing. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2024.106421

Journal information: Journal of Business Venturing Provided by Washington State University

Study Reveals Employees Favor Human Performance Monitors Over AI

Leave a Reply

Research from Cornell University reveals that organisations utilising AI to monitor employee behaviour and productivity may face increased complaints, reduced productivity, and higher turnover rates unless the technology is perceived as a developmental tool rather than merely evaluative. The study highlights that surveillance technologies are often seen as more intrusive than human oversight, leading to employees’ loss of autonomy. This perception can trigger resistance and negatively impact performance, underscoring the unintended consequences of using rapidly evolving technologies for employee assessment.

The researchers, including Emily Zitek, an associate professor of organisational behaviour, and first author Rachel Schlund, argue that there is an opportunity to foster positive change in employee behavior and productivity with the acceptance of surveillance tools. They propose that if these tools are framed as supportive of employee development rather than as judgmental tools lacking in context and accuracy, they can lead to improved performance and acceptance. Their findings are detailed in the paper “Algorithmic Versus Human Surveillance Leads to Lower Perceptions of Autonomy and Increased Resistance.”

In their research, Zitek and her team conducted four experiments with nearly 1,200 participants. In one experiment, participants reflected on their experiences of being monitored by either AI or human supervisors, noting a marked decrease in autonomy and an increase in resistance behaviours when monitored by AI. Another set of experiments involved participants brainstorming in groups and individually under the watch of either a human assistant or an AI tool presented via a Zoom videoconference as “AI Technology Feed.” Feedback suggesting insufficient idea generation was given in both scenarios, but the AI’s feedback led to notably fewer ideas and higher critique rates than human feedback.

The researchers also explored scenarios in a simulated call centre, where participants were monitored by either humans or AI for performance evaluation or developmental feedback. When the surveillance was framed as developmental, participants perceived less infringement on their autonomy and showed no increased intention to quit.

The findings suggest that organisations should carefully consider how they implement surveillance technologies. By emphasising developmental support and allowing for contextualisation of the surveillance data, organisations can mitigate the negative impacts of AI monitoring and improve employee acceptance and performance. This research underscores the delicate balance required in the deployment of AI surveillance tools within the workplace, respecting and valuing employee autonomy.

More information: Rachel Schlund et al, Algorithmic versus human surveillance leads to lower perceptions of autonomy and increased resistance, Communications Psychology. DOI: 10.1038/s44271-024-00102-8

Journal information: Communications Psychology Provided by Cornell University

Exploring the Potential Impact of Your Choice of Workstation on Your Health and Productivity: A Comprehensive Analysis

Leave a Reply

The assertion that “sitting is the new smoking” may sound exaggerated, but a substantial body of research supports the idea that a sedentary lifestyle is significantly detrimental to health when compared to a more active way of living. Office workers who are typically seated for the majority of their eight-hour workdays exhibit a higher likelihood of experiencing various health complications such as daytime fatigue, hypertension, and musculoskeletal pain than their counterparts who engage in more physical activity throughout the day. Innovative solutions such as standing desks have shown efficacy in alleviating these health issues and boosting overall productivity. However, the question of which type of workstation—be it stand-biased, sit-stand, or traditional—most effectively promotes physical activity and mitigates health risks remains a topic of ongoing debate and investigation, as our study will show.

To shed light on these uncertainties, a research team led by Tricia Lynn Salzar, DrPH, Kaysey Aguilar, PhD, and their colleagues at the Texas A&M University School of Public Health embarked on a detailed study. The team’s research methodology was distinctive in that it utilized computer usage metrics to indicate work productivity while comparing the effects of different workstations on user health and efficiency.

The study monitored the daily routines of 79 full-time adult office workers at a prominent university over a year from 2019 to 2020. These participants were organized into three groups based on the type of workstation they used: stand-biased, sit-stand, or traditional, with the latter serving as the control group. Stand-biased workstations are characterized by a fixed surface set at standing elbow height and often include options such as a drafting stool or a chair equipped with an extended cylinder. In contrast, sit-stand workstations are equipped with adjustable height surfaces that accommodate sitting or standing postures and are complemented by standard office chairs.

As part of the study, researchers meticulously collected a variety of data. This included demographic details, how often participants utilized office accessories like footrests, monitor arms, and keyboard trays, and how much time they spent standing versus sitting at their workstations. Participants’ comfort levels were also evaluated with surveys that asked them to report discomfort in various body parts, including the neck, back, and shoulders. To objectively measure productivity, computer usage was monitored covertly using data-logging software. Physical activity levels and energy expenditure were also tracked using sophisticated activity sensors throughout the workweek.

Preliminary analysis of the data showed no significant variance in keystroke frequency among the groups. However, the stand-biased group reported a higher word count and more typing errors than those using traditional workstations. Moreover, the activity data collected over 24 hours revealed that participants using stand-biased workstations spent more time standing and less time sitting. They also changed their position less frequently each hour than their peers in the traditional workstation group. Regarding discomfort, 65% of all study participants reported experiencing neck pain. Still, the conventional workstation users reported the highest incidence of lower back pain at 80%, in stark contrast to only 51.7% in the stand-biased group.

Dr. Aguilar concluded the study with a statement that underscores the practical implications of the study’s findings. He highlighted the potential health benefits of alternative workstation setups such as sit-stand or stand-biased desks. “The risks associated with sedentary work environments can be significantly reduced by integrating more dynamic workstation options,” he noted. “These alternatives not only foster better health outcomes but also support the high levels of productivity that employers demand.” This conclusion offers a reassuring endorsement of the effectiveness of alternative workstations in promoting health and productivity among office workers.

More information: Tricia Lynn Salzar et al, Stand-Capable Workstations Reduce Occupational Sedentary Time Among Administrative Workers, IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors. DOI: 10.1080/24725838.2024.2362720

Journal information: IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors Provided by Texas A&M University

Has Telecommuting Altered Travel Patterns in the U.S.?

Leave a Reply

The prevalence of remote work since the COVID-19 pandemic began has fundamentally transformed urban transportation dynamics in the U.S., according to a comprehensive study led by MIT researchers. The study highlights distinct effects of remote work on the number of vehicle miles driven and mass-transit usage across various U.S. regions. Yunhan Zheng SM ’21, PhD ’24, an MIT postdoc and co-author, noted a direct correlation between decreased onsite workers and reductions in vehicle miles driven and mass-transit ridership. Jinhua Zhao, an MIT professor and study co-author, pointed out that this research is pioneering in demonstrating remote work’s causal effects on nationwide transportation patterns.

The methodology incorporated a detailed examination across the lower 48 states, the District of Columbia, and 217 metropolitan areas, allowing the researchers to draw robust conclusions about the significant changes telecommuting has brought to mobility patterns. The paper, titled “Impacts of remote work on vehicle miles travelled and transit ridership in the USA,” has been published in Nature Cities. This publication is a collaborative effort among academics, including Zhao, the Professor of Cities and Transportation at MIT, who also leads the MIT Mobility Initiative and directs the JTL Urban Mobility Lab and Transit Lab.

The study utilized multiple sources, including Google location data, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the National Transit Database, and the U.S. Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes. It reveals significant state variations in how remote work has affected driving distances. Zheng points out that the impact of a 1 per cent increase in remote work leads to a much smaller reduction in vehicle miles in New York State compared to Texas, indicating notable regional differences.

Remote work has also significantly affected mass transit revenues, particularly in cities with heavily utilized transit systems like New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, and Philadelphia. These cities are among the top five most impacted by the shift to telecommuting, demonstrating the profound influence of remote work on urban transit systems.

Throughout the study period from early 2020 to late 2022, the effects of remote work on transportation patterns have remained surprisingly consistent. Zheng highlights that the impact was significant during the early pandemic phases when remote work was necessary and continued to be vital later when more workers could work remotely, suggesting long-term changes in work and travel behaviours.

Furthermore, the study estimates significant environmental benefits and challenges for mass transit due to increased remote work. Shenhao Wang, an assistant professor at the University of Florida and a study co-author, estimates that a 10 per cent decrease in onsite workers could reduce annual vehicle-related CO2 emissions by 191.8 million metric tons nationally. Additionally, a similar reduction in onsite workers would likely result in a yearly loss of 2.4 billion transit trips and $3.7 billion in fare revenue, equating to 27 per cent of the annual transit ridership and fare revenue in 2019. As Zhao advises, this substantial impact on transit ridership underlines the need for transit agencies to adapt their services, focusing on trips outside of the traditional commute and implementing more flexible schedules to better align with the new demand patterns.

More information: Yunhan Zheng et al, Impacts of remote work on vehicle miles traveled and transit ridership in the USA, Nature Cities. DOI: 10.1038/s44284-024-00057-1

Journal information: Nature Cities Provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Research examines the effects of genetic testing in the workplace on health habits of employees

Leave a Reply

Genetic testing has yet to become a routine part of workplace wellness initiatives. Still, researchers from The Jackson Laboratory and the University of Michigan are investigating the potential impact if it were incorporated. Their study, scheduled for publication in the August edition of Genetics in Medicine, captures real-world perspectives from employees following employer-sponsored genetic testing. It sheds light on how these insights could help employers make educated decisions about including genetic testing in their health programmes.

Looking towards the future of individual health management, Kunal Sanghavi, MBBS, M.S., CGC, Associate Director of Genetic Counseling at The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine and a lead researcher in the study, remarked, “Genetic testing might very well shape the future of personal health.” He highlighted the study’s relevance to ongoing research at JAX that focuses on genetic markers and their application in personalised medicine, potentially offering precise treatments to those most in need.

The research involved a survey of employees from an extensive healthcare system, which employed about 30,000 individuals and introduced a genetic testing (wGT) option in their wellness benefits in the autumn of 2018. A third-party service conducted this programme. It included testing for genes linked to higher risks of cancer and heart disease and pharmacogenes that influence how a person metabolises medications and their susceptibility to side effects.

Of 776 survey respondents, 418 underwent genetic testing and received their results. The survey sought details on their health service usage and changes in health behaviours following their results. Among those tested, 12% were informed of an elevated cancer risk and 9.5% learned of an increased heart disease risk. These individuals were significantly more likely to consult a healthcare professional and change their health habits. Furthermore, 31.4% of those who underwent genetic testing found the pharmacogenomic results potentially helpful for future medical prescriptions.

Elizabeth Charnysh, M.S., CGC, a genetic counsellor at JAX and the study’s lead author, noted that most participants felt their results quenched their curiosity about their health status, with 74.7% affirming this sentiment. She also mentioned that those with negative results often felt reassured about their health. However, she cautioned against overconfidence as negative results do not eliminate other risk factors like lifestyle or family history, potentially leading to false reassurance and employee misunderstandings.

The broader project, “Ethical, Legal, Social and Policy Implications of Workplace Genetic Testing,” aims to comprehensively examine employee and employer views on genetic testing at work. Led by Charles Lee, PhD, FACMG, scientific director and Robert Alvine Family Endowed Chair and professor at The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, along with the University of Michigan Professor Scott Roberts, PhD, the project uses a multi-faceted approach to guide the national implementation of workplace genetic testing. Insights from this research might also influence other new genetic testing initiatives intended for the general public. Further studies from this team will explore ethical considerations and the broader consequences of workplace genetic testing, aiming to maximise its benefits and minimise potential harms.

Professor Roberts commented on the promising signs that employees who discovered their increased risks were taking preventative measures but emphasised the need for future research to verify the health benefits realised by participants in workplace genetic testing programmes.

More information: Elizabeth Charnysh et al, Health care utilization and behavior changes after workplace genetic testing at a large US health care system, Genetics in Medicine. DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2024.101160

Journal information: Genetics in Medicine Provided by Jackson Laboratory

Study Reveals That Working from Home May Be Hindering Innovation and Creativity

Leave a Reply

According to recent research, remote and hybrid working arrangements, acclaimed for enhancing employee work-life balance, may inadvertently stifle innovation. A joint study by economists from the University of Essex and the University of Chicago highlights that employees who work in a hybrid setting tend to generate less innovative ideas than those who work exclusively in the office. Furthermore, individuals who work entirely from home produce ideas of a lower quality than their counterparts who are always in the office.

Dr Christoph Siemroth, the lead researcher, explained that innovation is often sparked by unplanned and spontaneous interactions among colleagues, typically occurring during informal ‘watercooler’ conversations. The shift to home offices limits these valuable interactions, leading to a noticeable decline in innovative outcomes. Despite the post-pandemic world’s reluctance to return fully to office environments, many companies have adopted a hybrid model, blending the benefits of home and office working environments. This approach is supported by the flexibility it offers. Yet, it also raises concerns among business leaders about its impact on innovation, as corroborated by the findings published in the journal Scientific Reports.

Dr Siemroth, associated with Essex’s Department of Economics, acknowledges the potential justification for this trade-off, given the significant benefits of enhanced work-life balance that make flexible employers more attractive. However, he suggests that to mitigate the negative impact on innovation, organizations should coordinate the office days of their teams more effectively. He recommends setting specific days for entire teams to work together in the office, which, while reducing the flexibility of hybrid work, significantly enhances innovative results.

The research involved over 48,000 employees from a giant Indian IT company, observed during various working arrangements, including fully office-based, fully remote, and hybrid. Despite innovation not being the primary role of these employees, the company has made considerable efforts to instil a culture that views innovation as a critical job component, offering financial rewards for innovative ideas. These initiatives aim to promote ideas that improve business processes, reduce costs, or introduce new products.

Interestingly, the research showed that while the quantity of ideas remained stable, the quality suffered during the home working periods. Additionally, during the hybrid working phase, the quantity and quality of innovative ideas declined, particularly in teams that needed more coordinated schedules for office attendance.

This study illuminates the complex dynamics of modern work arrangements and their unintended impacts on business innovation. While remote and hybrid models offer considerable benefits regarding employee satisfaction and balance, they require thoughtful implementation to ensure they do not compromise the creative and innovative capabilities vital for long-term business success.

More information: Michael Gibbs et al, Employee innovation during office work, work from home and hybrid work, Scientific Reports. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-67122-6

Journal information: Scientific Reports Provided by University of Essex

AI Expertise Opens Doors: Insights from a Recent Study

Leave a Reply

Researchers at Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) conducted an innovative experiment by submitting CVs for job vacancies aimed at British 21-year-olds with a 2:1 degree, highlighting an intriguing aspect: the inclusion of AI capital. Some applicants had taken an ‘AI in business’ module, which was prominently mentioned in their cover letters. This study adopted a matched pair method where a male applicant with AI capital and another without would apply for the same job. This resulted in 1,360 applications from male candidates to 680 UK companies and 1,316 from female candidates to 658 firms.

The data gathered showed a clear advantage for applicants equipped with AI capital. Male candidates with AI qualifications received interview invites in 54% of cases, while their counterparts without AI capital had a 28% invitation rate. Female applicants saw similar trends, with a 50% interview invitation rate for those with AI skills compared to 32% for those lacking them. The study revealed that this AI capital advantage was significantly more pronounced in larger firms, where applicants were 36 percentage points more likely to be invited for interviews than in smaller and medium-sized firms.

Moreover, the benefits of AI capital extended beyond just the likelihood of getting an interview. Male applicants with AI qualifications were considered for positions offering wages approximately 12% higher than those provided for males without such skills. Female applicants with AI capabilities were presented with job opportunities that paid, on average, 13% more than those available to their non-AI-skilled peers.

Professor Nick Drydakis, the study’s lead author and a Professor of Economics at ARU, shed light on AI’s transformative impact on the UK job market. He emphasized the necessity for firms to enhance their workforce’s AI competencies in response to these changes. According to him, the study conclusively shows that employers greatly value AI knowledge and skills among job applicants, with those possessing AI capital significantly more likely to secure interview opportunities and access higher-paying jobs.

Professor Drydakis elaborated on the types of skills encompassed by AI capital, which include data analysis, data-driven decision-making, creativity, innovation, and effective communication. These skills are pivotal in enhancing business operations, improving efficiency, and boosting a firm’s productivity. He noted that larger firms, in particular, tend to place a higher value on AI capital, possibly due to their larger-scale AI-driven technological transformations and greater capacity for innovation.

This research highlights the increasing importance of AI skills in securing employment. Acquiring such skills can be a strategic move for individuals aiming for higher wages and better job opportunities in an increasingly competitive job market.

More information: Nick Drydakis et al, Artificial intelligence capital and employment prospects, Oxford Economic Papers. DOI: 10.1093/oep/gpae005

Journal information: Oxford Economic Papers Provided by Anglia Ruskin University