Table 4.

Separate associations between each independent variable and telework preference with “continue the same” as the reference category, adjusted for age, gender and education

Variable and categoriesDecrease teleworkIncrease telework
OR95% CIp (adj.)OR95% CIp (adj.)
Amount of telework1.230.98, 1.560.250.700.62, 0.79<0.001
Workplace experiences      
Access to quiet spacea      
21.040.30, 3.630.960.340.18, 0.660.009
31.180.34, 4.130.910.180.09, 0.36<0.001
Access to spaces for spontaneous discussionsa     
20.430.12, 1.630.490.250.10, 0.630.016
30.580.16, 2.180.720.210.09, 0.530.007
Access to bookable meeting roomsb      
30.980.62, 1.560.961.230.83, 1.840.60
Ease of workspace-switchingc      
21.980.25, 15.970.740.350.15, 0.790.05
31.140.14, 9.520.950.250.11, 0.580.009
42.040.26, 16.050.720.130.05, 0.29<0.001
52.290.28, 18.890.720.190.08, 0.470.004
Person–environment fitd      
21.940.41, 9.200.720.740.34, 1.630.72
30.500.08, 2.890.720.340.14, 0.810.06
41.520.34, 6.740.770.340.16, 0.720.02
52.240.50, 10.090.600.260.12, 0.590.009
Support for interactiond      
20.410.11, 1.480.421.190.35, 4.000.91
30.820.25, 2.690.890.990.30, 3.290.98
40.470.15, 1.520.480.870.27, 2.840.91
50.500.14, 1.720.590.680.20, 2.330.76
Availability of colleaguesd      
20.460.16, 1.350.411.060.35, 3.200.95
30.490.17, 1.380.420.590.19, 1.790.66
40.360.13, 1.010.180.800.28, 2.320.87
50.400.13, 1.210.300.880.29, 2.670.91
Being able to detach oneself from work in break roomd     
21.430.45, 4.570.760.420.21, 0.850.06
30.820.24, 2.760.890.320.16, 0.660.01
41.110.37, 3.390.920.250.13, 0.47<0.001
51.570.50, 4.890.720.260.12, 0.520.002
Furniture ergonomics and comfortd      
20.840.08, 8.820.950.880.31, 2.500.91
32.180.26, 18.220.720.610.22, 1.670.66
42.040.26, 16.030.720.370.14, 0.950.14
52.220.28, 17.680.720.390.15, 1.020.18
Sufficient space to workb,d      
30.530.16, 1.760.600.410.22, 0.770.024
41.420.60, 3.320.720.290.17, 0.48<0.001
51.420.60, 3.350.720.210.12, 0.37<0.001
Sufficient storage spaced      
20.570.17, 1.860.660.600.29, 1.250.42
31.060.35, 3.220.950.600.28, 1.270.43
41.190.43, 3.260.890.360.18, 0.730.022
51.120.40, 3.090.910.290.15, 0.600.006
Satisfaction with cleanlinessd      
20.560.04, 7.590.860.600.09, 3.900.78
30.680.07, 6.690.890.540.10, 3.050.72
40.680.08, 6.010.890.610.12, 3.180.76
50.790.09, 6.930.910.490.09, 2.560.72
Task privacye1.361.15, 1.620.0040.690.61, 0.79<0.001
Psychosocial factors      
Participatory safetye0.860.65, 1.140.600.850.68, 1.060.40
Support for innovatione0.790.61, 1.020.240.830.67, 1.020.25
Visione0.980.67, 1.430.950.910.67, 1.250.77
Task orientatione0.940.70, 1.260.860.830.65, 1.060.35
Relational justicee1.621.11, 2.350.0500.700.56, 0.880.01
Job demandsf0.910.70, 1.180.720.960.77, 1.210.89
Effort-reward imbalancef0.770.40, 1.480.722.101.42, 3.120.002
Employee well-being      
Work abilitye1.450.90, 2.340.351.260.84, 1.890.57
Work engagemente0.930.77, 1.130.720.840.73, 0.970.06
Burnoutf1.440.95, 2.180.261.421.02, 1.970.14

Notes:

aScale: 1 No = not at all (ref.), 3 Yes; sufficient; bCategories 1–2 were combined (ref.) due to a low number of responses; cScale: 1 Very difficult (ref.), 5 Very easy; dScale: 1 Strongly disagree (ref.), 5 Strongly agree; eHigher scores indicate more positive perception; fHigher scores indicate more negative perception; OR = odds ratio; adj. = adjusted using the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure; Statistically significant findings (p < 0.05) are italics

Source: Authors’ own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal