Author
Listed:
- Courtney Bir
- Jinho Jung
- Nicole Olynk Widmar
Abstract
Working-From-Home (WFH) practices expanded rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic and continue to be a point of discussion today with debates increasingly focused on productivity rather than the underlying reasons for WFH or flexibility. This study investigates why individuals value WFH and hybrid work arrangements in the United States. The specific period of study was during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding these motivations can inform constructive negotiations and effective policies that enhance productivity while supporting employees’ work–life balance and caregiving responsibilities. Despite extensive discussion of whether employers should permit WFH, the diverse reasons employees seek flexibility remain understudied. Using data from a nationally representative online survey conducted in late 2021, we employ a best–worst scaling experiment to rank motivations for remote work. Results show the most valued reason for WFH is balancing work with caregiving, followed by reducing commuting time and costs, limiting exposure to illness, and preferring the home environment. A latent class model identifies four heterogeneous preference segments: (1) caregiving and commuting, (2) productivity and comfort, (3) multitasking and health safety, and (4) diffuse preferences without a dominant motivation. Additionally, seemingly unrelated regression analysis links WFH preferences with behavioral changes in grooming, attire, and personal care routines. These findings highlight the heterogeneity in workers’ motivations for flexibility and suggest that one-size-fits-all approaches may be inefficient. By revealing the underlying drivers of WFH preferences, this study offers nuanced insights for organizations seeking to design flexible work policies that balance productivity objectives with employee well-being.
Suggested Citation
Courtney Bir & Jinho Jung & Nicole Olynk Widmar, 2026.
"Understanding why people value working from home or hybrid workplace flexibility a study of preferences during the COVID-19 pandemic,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(5), pages 1-18, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0348206
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0348206
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pone00:0348206. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.