IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v39y2021i1p84-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Present-but-online: How mobile devices may harm purposeful co-presence in organizations (and what can be done about it)

Author

Listed:
  • Christensen, Peter Holdt
  • Foss, Nicolai J.

Abstract

The introduction of mobile devices (e.g., smartphones and tablets), to the workplace has had many positive effects. While research also indicates that mobile devices may lead to the misallocation and depletion of attention, the negative effects, particularly on interactions in organizations, remain less well understood. We draw on micro-sociology to analyze the use of mobile devices in situations of purposeful co-presence, such as meetings and settings that require a joint effort to solve one or more problems. In these situations, the use of mobile devices is likely to de-energize actors and lead to behaviors that are contrary to the aims of establishing situations of purposeful co-presence. We identify ways in which organizations can avoid the negative consequences of mobile devices (while keeping the positive consequences), ranging from building norms regarding the use of such devices to restructuring work processes (e.g., making activities less interdependent and making less use of purposeful co-presence).

Suggested Citation

  • Christensen, Peter Holdt & Foss, Nicolai J., 2021. "Present-but-online: How mobile devices may harm purposeful co-presence in organizations (and what can be done about it)," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 84-94.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:39:y:2021:i:1:p:84-94
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237320301158
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2020.07.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alchian, Armen A & Demsetz, Harold, 1972. "Production , Information Costs, and Economic Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 777-795, December.
    2. Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1986. "Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1492-1512, November.
    3. Ariane Ollier-Malaterre & Nancy P. Rothbard & Justin Berg, 2013. "When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships," Post-Print hal-00785979, HAL.
    4. Stephen R. Barley & Debra E. Meyerson & Stine Grodal, 2011. "E-mail as a Source and Symbol of Stress," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 887-906, August.
    5. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    6. Adrian F. Ward & Kristen Duke & Ayelet Gneezy & Maarten W. Bos, 2017. "Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(2), pages 140-154.
    7. Morten T. Hansen, 2002. "Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 232-248, June.
    8. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, December.
    9. Tiziana Casciaro & Miguel Sousa Lobo, 2015. "Affective Primacy in Intraorganizational Task Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 373-389, April.
    10. Pamela J. Hinds & Catherine Durnell Cramton, 2014. "Situated Coworker Familiarity: How Site Visits Transform Relationships Among Distributed Workers," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 794-814, June.
    11. J. Stuart Bunderson & Ray E. Reagans, 2011. "Power, Status, and Learning in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1182-1194, October.
    12. Foss, Nicolai J, 2001. "Leadership, Beliefs and Coordination: An Explorative Discussion," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(2), pages 357-388, June.
    13. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 2006. "Mindfulness and the Quality of Organizational Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 514-524, August.
    14. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    15. Leroy, Sophie, 2009. "Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 168-181, July.
    16. Melissa Mazmanian & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2013. "The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1337-1357, October.
    17. Anca Metiu & Nancy P. Rothbard, 2013. "Task Bubbles, Artifacts, Shared Emotion, and Mutual Focus of Attention: A Comparative Study of the Microprocesses of Group Engagement," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 455-475, April.
    18. Ray Reagans, 2011. "Close Encounters: Analyzing How Social Similarity and Propinquity Contribute to Strong Network Connections," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 835-849, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giurge, Laura M. & Bohns, Vanessa K., 2021. "You don’t need to answer right away! Receivers overestimate how quickly senders expect responses to non-urgent work emails," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 114-128.
    2. Ma, Danni & Fee, Anthony & Grabowski, Simone & Scerri, Moira, 2022. "Dual Organizational Identification in Multinational Enterprises and Interpersonal Horizontal Knowledge Sharing: A Conceptual Model," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1).
    3. Dellestrand, Henrik & Holm, Ulf & Lindahl, Olof, 2023. "Moving beyond the transfer dyad: Exploring network influences on transfer effectiveness," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2).
    4. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    5. Starling David Hunter & Henrik Bentzen & Jan Taug, 2020. "On the “missing link” between formal organization and informal social structure," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Gianluigi Giustiziero & Tobias Kretschmer & Deepak Somaya & Brian Wu, 2023. "Hyperspecialization and hyperscaling: A resource‐based theory of the digital firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 1391-1424, June.
    7. Ruthanne Huising, 2014. "The Erosion of Expert Control Through Censure Episodes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1633-1661, December.
    8. Gebauer, Judith & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2013. "Joining Supply and Demand Conditions of IT Enabled Change: Toward an Economic Theory of Inter-firm Modulation," Working Papers 13-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    9. Rajat Khanna & Isin Guler, 2022. "Degree assortativity in collaboration networks and invention performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1402-1430, July.
    10. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    11. Ulrich Witt, 2007. "Firms as Realizations of Entrepreneurial Visions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(7), pages 1125-1140, November.
    12. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    13. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    14. Nicolai J. Foss & Torben Pedersen, 2019. "Microfoundations in international management research: The case of knowledge sharing in multinational corporations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1594-1621, December.
    15. Uwe Jirjahn & Kornelius Kraft, 2010. "Teamwork And Intra‐Firm Wage Dispersion Among Blue‐Collar Workers," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 57(4), pages 404-429, September.
    16. Sunkee Lee, 2019. "Learning-by-Moving: Can Reconfiguring Spatial Proximity Between Organizational Members Promote Individual-level Exploration?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 467-488, May.
    17. Massimo Maoret & Marco Tortoriello & Daniela Iubatti, 2020. "Big Fish, Big Pond? The Joint Effect of Formal and Informal Core/Periphery Positions on the Generation of Incremental Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1538-1559, November.
    18. Rocio Bonet & Fabrizio Salvador, 2017. "When the Boss Is Away: Manager–Worker Separation and Worker Performance in a Multisite Software Maintenance Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 244-261, April.
    19. Phanish Puranam & Marlo Raveendran, 2013. "Interdependence and organization design," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2004. "To Use or To Sell Technological Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200405, University of Turin.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:39:y:2021:i:1:p:84-94. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.