IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2025-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Career Penalties for Flexible Working: How Organizational Culture Shapes Managerial Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Kasperska

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics (LabFam), University of Warsaw)

  • Anna Matysiak

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics (LabFam), University of Warsaw)

  • Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics (LabFam), University of Warsaw)

Abstract

This study explores how organizational factors influence managerial decision-making regarding the career advancement of employees working from home. Despite a large body of research on the new modes of working, a gap persists concerning the role of the organizational context in shaping these dynamics. In this article, we investigate whether managers’ promotion and pay decisions depend on the employee's use of remote work and whether these decisions are moderated by the presence of the ideal worker norms (i.e. high work devotion and centrality) and family-friendly policies (childcare-related and flexible work options) in their work environments. We use data from a choice experiment, which included over 1,000 managers from the United Kingdom. The experiment was run in the second half of 2022, and therefore, this study provides post-pandemic evidence and represents the “new normal” settings. The findings indicate that employees who work fully remotely are less likely to be considered for promotion and a salary increase than on-site workers. This pattern is observed particularly in firms with more demanding organizational cultures, namely those with stronger ideal worker norms and/or fewer family-friendly policies. Importantly, both male and female remote workers experience career penalties, albeit in distinct ways, as both ideal worker norms and family-friendly policies appear important for men, whereas for women, it is primarily the availability of supportive policies that influences outcomes. The findings underscore the significant impact of organizational culture on managerial decision-making, with implications for both theory and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Kasperska & Anna Matysiak & Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska, 2025. "Career Penalties for Flexible Working: How Organizational Culture Shapes Managerial Decisions," Working Papers 2025-17, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
  • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2025-17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/download_file/6094/0
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erin Reid, 2015. "Embracing, Passing, Revealing, and the Ideal Worker Image: How People Navigate Expected and Experienced Professional Identities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 997-1017, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Arntz, Melanie & Ben Yahmed, Sarra & Berlingieri, Francesco, 2022. "Working from home, hours worked and wages: Heterogeneity by gender and parenthood," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    4. Diane E. Bailey & Samer Faraj & Pamela J. Hinds & Paul M. Leonardi & Georg von Krogh, 2022. "We Are All Theorists of Technology Now: A Relational Perspective on Emerging Technology and Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Stephanie Bertels & Jennifer Howard-Grenville & Simon Pek, 2016. "Cultural Molding, Shielding, and Shoring at Oilco: The Role of Culture in the Integration of Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 573-593, June.
    6. Anna Matysiak & Dorota Węziak-Białowolska, 2016. "Country-Specific Conditions for Work and Family Reconciliation: An Attempt at Quantification," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 475-510, October.
    7. Sue Williamson & Linda Colley & Meraiah Foley, 2022. "Public servants working from home: Exploring managers’ changing allowance decisions in a COVID-19 context," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(1), pages 37-55, March.
    8. Prithwiraj (Raj) Choudhury & Cirrus Foroughi & Barbara Larson, 2021. "Work‐from‐anywhere: The productivity effects of geographic flexibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 655-683, April.
    9. Raymond F. Zammuto & Terri L. Griffith & Ann Majchrzak & Deborah J. Dougherty & Samer Faraj, 2007. "Information Technology and the Changing Fabric of Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 749-762, October.
    10. Nicholas Bloom & Ruobing Han & James Liang, 2024. "Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance," Nature, Nature, vol. 630(8018), pages 920-925, June.
    11. Agnieszka Kasperska & Anna Matysiak & Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska, 2024. "Managerial (dis)preferences towards employees working from home: Post-pandemic experimental evidence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-19, May.
    12. Paolino, Philip, 2021. "Predicted Probabilities and Inference with Multinomial Logit," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 416-421, July.
    13. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    14. Beham, Barbara & Baierl, Andreas & Eckner, Janin, 2020. "When does part-time employment allow managers with family responsibilities to stay on the career track? A vignette study among German managers," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 580-590.
    15. Michael Gibbs & Friederike Mengel & Christoph Siemroth, 2023. "Work from Home and Productivity: Evidence from Personnel and Analytics Data on Information Technology Professionals," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 7-41.
    16. Ioana C. Cristea & Paul M. Leonardi, 2019. "Get Noticed and Die Trying: Signals, Sacrifice, and the Production of Face Time in Distributed Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 552-572, May.
    17. Anne McMunn & Lauren Bird & Elizabeth Webb & Amanda Sacker, 2020. "Gender Divisions of Paid and Unpaid Work in Contemporary UK Couples," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(2), pages 155-173, April.
    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. Anna Matysiak & Agnieszka Kasperska & Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska, 2023. "Mechanisms Underlying the Effects of Work From Home on Careers in the Post-Covid Context," Working Papers 2023-28, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    2. Lee, Kangoh, 2023. "Working from home as an economic and social change: A review," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    3. Pablo Zarate & Mathias Dolls & Steven J. Davis & Nicholas Bloom & Jose Maria Barrero & Cevat Giray Aksoy, 2024. "Why Does Working from Home Vary across Countries and People?," CESifo Working Paper Series 11081, CESifo.
    4. Burdett, Ashley & Etheridge, Ben & Tang, Li & Wang, Yikai, 2024. "Worker productivity during Covid-19 and adaptation to working from home," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Nicholas Bloom & Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth, 2024. "Work from Home and Disability Employment," NBER Working Papers 32943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Erdsiek, Daniel & Rost, Vincent, 2023. "How do managers form their expectations about working from home? Survey experiments on the perception of productivity," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-018, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Sabrina Wulff Pabilonia & Victoria Vernon, 2025. "Remote work, wages, and hours worked in the United States," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 1-49, March.
    8. Erdsiek, Daniel & Rost, Vincent, 2022. "Working from home after COVID-19: Firms expect a persistent and intensive shift," ZEW Expert Briefs 22-06, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. 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.
    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. Kouki, Amairisa, 2024. "Work from home and the racial gap in female wages," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. Jiang, Mingyu & Yasui, Kengo & Yugami, Kazufumi, 2024. "Working from home, job tasks, and productivity," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8).
    13. Feuillade, Mylène & Goux, Dominique & Maurin, Eric, 2025. "Rise in Home Working and Spousal Labor Supply," IZA Discussion Papers 17997, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Thea Jansen & Andrea Ascani & Alessandra Faggian & Alessandro Palma, 2024. "Remote work and location preferences: a study of post-pandemic trends in Italy," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 73(3), pages 897-944, October.
    15. Achard, Pascal & Belot, Michèle & Chevalier, Arnaud, 2025. "When Parents Work from Home," IZA Discussion Papers 17957, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. 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.
    17. repec:rim:rimwps:25-04 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Alessandra Fenizia & Tom Kirchmaier, 2024. "Not incentivized yet efficient: Working from home in the public sector," CEP Discussion Papers dp2036, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. Janice C. dup Eberly & John dup 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.
    20. Lina Vyas, 2022. "“New normal” at work in a post-COVID world: work–life balance and labor markets [An employee-focused human resource management perspective for the management of global virtual teams]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(1), pages 155-167.
    21. Behrens, Kristian & Kichko, Sergei & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2024. "Working from home: Too much of a good thing?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J21 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Force and Employment, Size, and Structure

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:war:wpaper:2025-17. 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: Jacek Rapacz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    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.