IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/indrel/v55y2024i1p54-77.html

Missing voices: Office space discontent as a driving force in employee hybrid work preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Lila Skountridaki
  • W. Victoria Lee
  • Lilinaz Rouhani

Abstract

This paper draws on rich qualitative and survey data to show that employee discontent with office space is a major driving force in employee hybrid‐work preferences. Despite voice marginalisation, employees wish to take advantage of increased control over their physical working conditions and the locus of work that hybrid work has unexpectedly brought in their working lives. Taking cues from the literature on employee voice, this paper suggests that employee missing or silenced voices can be conceptualised as latent: hidden but potentially influential and inactive but potentially triggered by shifts in the labour market conditions or other external to organisations changes. The paper also brings attention to empirical academic studies as an employee voice mechanism.

Suggested Citation

  • Lila Skountridaki & W. Victoria Lee & Lilinaz Rouhani, 2024. "Missing voices: Office space discontent as a driving force in employee hybrid work preferences," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 54-77, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:indrel:v:55:y:2024:i:1:p:54-77
    DOI: 10.1111/irj.12415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12415
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/irj.12415?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beauregard, T. Alexandra & Henry, Lesley C., 2009. "Making the link between work-life balance practices and organizational performance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 25224, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Bell, Myrtle P. & Özbilgin, Mustafa F. & Beauregard, T. Alexandra & Sürgevil, Olca, 2011. "Voice, silence, and diversity in 21st century organizations: strategies for inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 32094, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    4. Posner, Daniel N., 2004. "The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas Are Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 529-545, November.
    5. Barrero, Jose Maria & Bloom, Nick & Davis, Steven J., 2020. "Why Working From Home Will Stick," SocArXiv wfdbe, Center for Open Science.
    6. Saks, Alan M. & Gruman, Jamie A., 2021. "How do you socialize newcomers during a pandemic?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1-2), pages 217-220, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lila Skountridaki & Oliver Mallett, 2025. "‘I Can Just Do Work I'm Paid to Do’: Hybrid Work and Tertiary Labour Time Gains," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(5), pages 339-352, September.
    2. Alan Felstead & Rhys Davies & Duncan Gallie & Francis Green & Golo Henseke & Ying Zhou, 2026. "The Spatial Anatomy of Working at Home: Concepts, Measures and Types of Spaces Used," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 274-286, July.

    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. Deole, Sumit S. & Deter, Max & Huang, Yue, 2023. "Home sweet home: Working from home and employee performance during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Ro’i Zultan & Eldar Dadon, 2023. "Missing the forest for the trees: when monitoring quantitative measures distorts task prioritization," Working Papers 2319, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    3. Bloom, Nicholas & Davis, Steven J. & Hansen, Stephen & Lambert, Peter John & Sadun, Raffaella & Taska, Bledi, 2023. "Remote work across jobs, companies and space," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121302, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Rost Vincent & Erdsiek Daniel, 2026. "Gekommen, um zu bleiben: Homeoffice verstetigt sich auf hohem Niveau," Wirtschaftsdienst, Sciendo, vol. 106(3), pages 221-225.
    5. Andrew L. Kun & Raffaella Sadun & Orit Shaer & Thomaz Teodorovicz, 2022. "How does working from home during COVID-19 affect what managers do? Evidence from time-use studies," POID Working Papers 029, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    6. Elstner, Steffen & Grimme, Christian & Kecht, Valentin & Lehmann, Robert, 2022. "The diffusion of technological progress in ICT," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    7. Vij, Akshay & Souza, Flavio F. & Barrie, Helen & Anilan, V. & Sarmiento, Sergio & Washington, Lynette, 2023. "Employee preferences for working from home in Australia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 782-800.
    8. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2026. "Mismatch in Preferences for Working from Home: Evidence from Discrete Choice Experiments with Workers and Employers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 79(1), pages 142-172, January.
    9. Jiang, Mingyu & Yasui, Kengo & Yugami, Kazufumi, 2024. "Working from home, job tasks, and productivity," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8).
    10. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2024. "Working from home, commuting, and gender," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(3), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Gupta, Arpit & Mittal, Vrinda & Peeters, Jonas & Van Nieuwerburgh, Stijn, 2022. "Flattening the curve: Pandemic-Induced revaluation of urban real estate," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 594-636.
    12. Jose Maria Barrero & Nicholas Bloom & Kathryn Bonney & Cory Breaux & Catherine Buffington & Steven J. Davis & Lucia Foster & Brian McKenzie & Keith Savage & Cristina Tello-Trillo, 2026. "Tapping Business and Household Surveys to Sharpen Our View of Work from Home," NBER Chapters, in: The Changing Nature of Work, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Masayuki Morikawa, 2023. "Productivity dynamics of remote work during the COVID‐19 pandemic," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 317-331, July.
    14. Erdsiek, Daniel, 2021. "Working from home during COVID-19 and beyond: Survey evidence from employers," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-051, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Breda, Thomas & Dutronc-Postel, Paul & Pecheu, Vladimir, 2026. "Does feasibility explain the unequal development of working from home?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    16. Janice Eberly & John G. Fernald, 2022. "Jackson Hole 2022 - Reassessing Economic Constraints: Potential Output (The Impact of COVID on Productivity and Potential Output)," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, August.
    17. Christos A. Makridis, 2025. "The Allocation of Time and Remote Work," CESifo Working Paper Series 12363, CESifo.
    18. Biermann, Marcus, 2024. "Remote talks: Changes to economics seminars during COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    19. Guillaume Gueguen & Claudia Senik, 2023. "Adopting telework: The causal impact of working from home on subjective well‐being," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 832-868, December.
    20. Julia Darby & Stuart McIntyre & Graeme Roy, 2022. "What can analysis of 47 million job advertisements tell us about how opportunities for homeworking are evolving in the United Kingdom?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 281-302, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:indrel:v:55:y:2024:i:1:p:54-77. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0019-8692 .

    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.