The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of telework research: findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work
Abstract
Telework has inspired research in disciplines ranging from transportation and urban planning to ethics, law, sociology, and organizational studies. In our review of this literature, we seek answers to three questions: who participates in telework, why they do, and what happens when they do? Who teleworks remains elusive, but research suggests that male professionals and female clerical workers predominate. Notably, work‐related factors like managers' willingness are most predictive of which employees will telework. Employees' motivations for teleworking are also unclear, as commonly perceived reasons such as commute reduction and family obligations do not appear instrumental. On the firms' side, managers' reluctance, forged by concerns about cost and control and bolstered by little perceived need, inhibits the creation of telework programmes. As for outcomes, little clear evidence exists that telework increases job satisfaction and productivity, as it is often asserted to do. We suggest three steps for future research may provide richer insights: consider group and organizational level impacts to understand who telework affects, reconsider why people telework, and emphasize theory‐building and links to existing organizational theories. We conclude with lessons learned from the telework literature that may be relevant to research on new work forms and workplaces. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Cited by
Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples
Torraco, R. J. (2005) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484305278283 · Cited by 3,534
Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524 · Cited by 2,616
How Effective Is Telecommuting? Assessing the Status of Our Scientific Findings
Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100615593273 · Cited by 1,788
Achieving Effective Remote Working During the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Work Design Perspective
Wang, B., Liu, Y., Qian, J., & Parker, S. K. (2021) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12290 · Cited by 1,722
“As criticized in Bailey and Kurland (2002), “[the] occasional, infrequent manner in which telework is practiced, likely has rendered mute many suspected individual-level outcomes for the bulk of the teleworking population” (p. 396).”
BackgroundKossek, E. E., Lautsch, B. A., & Eaton, S. C. (2006) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.07.002 · Cited by 1,087
Metadata
- Authors
- Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-04-25
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 383-400
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W2156430033
- Cited by
- 1,604
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 65.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of telework research: findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/job.144
- The paper
- Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.144
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.