CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 72Virtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFacilities and Workplace ManagementWork-Family Balance Challenges

Towards a Metaverse Workspace: Opportunities, Challenges, and Design Implications

Open access
Park, Hyanghee, Ahn, Daehwan, Lee, Joonhwan·2023·Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3544548.3581306
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Both enterprises and their employees have globally experienced remote work at an unprecedented scale since the outbreak of COVID-19. As the pandemic becomes less of a threat, some companies have called their employees back to a physical office, citing issues related to working remotely, but many employees have refused to return. Thus, working in the metaverse has gained much attention as an alternative that could complement the weaknesses of completely remote work or even offline work. However, we do not know yet what benefits and drawbacks the metaverse has as a legitimate workspace, because there are few real cases of 1) working in the metaverse and 2) working remotely at such an unprecedented scale. Thus, this paper aims to identify real challenges and opportunities the metaverse workspace presents when compared to remote work by conducting semi-structured interviews and participatory workshops with various employees and company stakeholders (e.g., HR managers and CEOs) who have experienced at least two of three work types: working in a physical office, remotely, or in the metaverse. Consequently, we identified 1) advantages and disadvantages of remote work and 2) opportunities and challenges of the metaverse. We further discuss design implications that may overcome the identified challenges of working in the metaverse.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3544548.3581306

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Balazs Aczel, Marton Kovacs, Tanja van der Lippe, and Barnabas Szaszi. 2021. Re- searchers working from home: Benefits and challenges. PLOS ONE 16, 3: e0249127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127 · DOI
  2. Diane E. Bailey and Nancy B. Kurland. 2002. A review of telework research: findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23, 4: 383-400. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.144 · DOI
  3. Verena Biener, Snehanjali Kalamkar, Negar Nouri, Eyal Ofek, Michel Pahud, John J. Dudley, Jinghui Hu, Per Ola Kristensson, Maheshya Weerasinghe, Klen Čopič Pucihar, Matjaž Kljun, Stephan Streuber, and Jens Grubert. 2022. Quantifying the Effects of Working in VR for One Week. Retrieved July 18, 2022 from http: //arxiv.org/abs/2206.03189
  4. Anna Bleakley, Daniel Rough, Justin Edwards, Philip Doyle, Odile Dumble- ton, Leigh Clark, Sean Rintel, Vincent Wade, and Benjamin R. Cowan. 2021. Bridging social distance during social distancing: exploring social talk and re- mote collegiality in video conferencing. Human-Computer Interaction 0, 0: 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2021.1994859 · DOI
  5. Carrie J Cai, Michelle Carney, Nida Zada, and Michael Terry. 2021. Breakdowns and Breakthroughs: Observing Musicians' Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445192 · DOI
  6. Kathy Charmaz and Liska Belgrave. 2012. Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft 2: 347-365.
  7. Janghee Cho, Samuel Beck, and Stephen Voida. 2022. Topophilia, Placemaking, and Boundary Work: Exploring the Psycho-Social Impact of the COVID-19 Work- From-Home Experience. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, GROUP: 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3492843 · DOI
  8. Hyoung-Yong Choi. 2022. Working in the Metaverse: Does Telework in a Meta- verse Office Have the Potential to Reduce Population Pressure in Megacities? Evidence from Young Adults in Seoul, South Korea. Sustainability 14, 6: 3629. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063629 · DOI
  9. Dahyar Daraba, Hillman Wirawan, Rudi Salam, and Muhammad Faisal. 2021. Working from home during the corona pandemic: Investigating the role of au- thentic leadership, psychological capital, and gender on employee performance. Cogent Business & Management 8, 1: 1885573. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975. 2021.1885573 · DOI
  10. Vittorio Di Martino and Linda Wirth. 1990. Telework: A New Way of Working and Living. International Labour Review 129, 5: 529-554.
  11. Thomas Erickson, N. Sadat Shami, Wendy A. Kellogg, and David W. Levine. 2011. Synchronous interaction among hundreds: an evaluation of a conference in an avatar-based virtual environment. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11), 503-512. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1978942.1979013 · DOI
  12. Steven Feiner, Blair MacIntyre, Marcus Haupt, and Eliot Solomon. 1993. Windows on the world: 2D windows for 3D augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 6th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (UIST '93), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1145/168642.168657 · DOI
  13. Alan Felstead and Golo Henseke. 2017. Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, well-being and work-life balance. New Technology, Work and Employment 32, 3: 195-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12097 · DOI
  14. Kathryn L. Fonner and Lara C. Stache. 2012. All in a day's work, at home: telework- ers' management of micro role transitions and the work-home boundary. New Technology, Work and Employment 27, 3: 242-257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 005X.2012.00290.x · DOI
  15. Mark Granovetter. 1983. The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited. Sociological Theory 1: 201-233. https://doi.org/10.2307/202051 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Christine A. Grant, Louise M. Wallace, and Peter C. Spurgeon. 2013. An ex- ploration of the psychological factors affecting remote e-worker's job effec- tiveness, well-being and work-life balance. Employee Relations 35, 5: 527-546. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08-2012-0059 · DOI
  17. Gunnar Harboe and Elaine M. Huang. 2015. Real-World Affinity Diagramming Practices: Bridging the Paper-Digital Gap. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 95-104. https://doi.org/10. 1145/2702123.2702561 · DOI
  18. E. Jeffrey Hill, Alan J. Hawkins, and Brent C. Miller. 1996. Work and Family in the Virtual Office: Perceived Influences of Mobile Telework. Family Relations 45, 3: 293-301. https://doi.org/10.2307/585501 · DOI
  19. Erzhen Hu, Md Aashikur Rahman Azim, and Seongkook Heo. 2022. FluidMeet: Enabling Frictionless Transitions Between In-Group, Between-Group, and Private Conversations During Virtual Breakout Meetings. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517558 · DOI
  20. Xinlan Emily Hu, Rebecca Hinds, Melissa Valentine, and Michael S. Bernstein. 2022. A" Distance Matters" Paradox: Facilitating Intra-Team Collaboration Can Harm Inter-Team Collaboration. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW1: 1-36.
  21. Youjin Hwang, Donghoon Shin, Jinsu Eun, Bongwon Suh, and Joonhwan Lee. 2021. Design Guidelines of a Computer-Based Intervention for Computer Vision Syndrome: Focus Group Study and Real-World Deployment. Journal of Medical Internet Research 23, 3: e22099. https://doi.org/10.2196/22099 · DOI
  22. Anne Kaduk, Katie Genadek, Erin L. Kelly, and Phyllis Moen. 2019. Involuntary vs. voluntary flexible work: insights for scholars and stakeholders. Community, Work & Family 22, 4: 412-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2019.1616532 · DOI
  23. Yoojung Kim, Arpita Bhattacharya, Julie A. Kientz, and Jin Ha Lee. 2020. "It Should Be a Game for Fun, Not Exercise": Tensions in Designing Health-Related Features for Pokémon GO. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376830 · DOI
  24. Benjamin Koehne, Patrick C. Shih, and Judith S. Olson. 2012. Remote and alone: coping with being the remote member on the team. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work -CSCW '12, 1257. https: //doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145393 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Udo Konradt, Guido Hertel, and Renate Schmook. 2003. Quality of management by objectives, task-related stressors, and non-task-related stressors as predictors of stress and job satisfaction among teleworkers. European Journal of Work and Or- ganizational Psychology 12, 1: 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320344000020 · DOI
  26. Ellen Ernst Kossek and Brenda A. Lautsch. 2018. Work-life flexibility for whom? Occupational status and work-life inequality in upper, middle, and lower level jobs. Academy of Management Annals 12, 1: 5-36.
  27. Laurent M. Lapierre, Elianne F. van Steenbergen, Maria C. W. Peeters, and Esther S. Kluwer. 2016. Juggling work and family responsibilities when involuntarily working more from home: A multiwave study of financial sales professionals. Journal of Organizational Behavior 37, 6: 804-822. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2075 · DOI
  28. Lik-Hang Lee, Tristan Braud, Pengyuan Zhou, Lin Wang, Dianlei Xu, Zijun Lin, Abhishek Kumar, Carlos Bermejo, and Pan Hui. 2021. All One Needs to Know about Metaverse: A Complete Survey on Technological Singularity, Virtual Ecosystem, and Research Agenda. arXiv:2110.05352 [cs]. Retrieved October 31, 2021 from http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.05352 · arXiv
  29. Minha Lee, Wonyoung Park, Sunok Lee, and Sangsu Lee. 2022. Distracting Mo- ments in Videoconferencing: A Look Back at the Pandemic Period. In CHI Con- ference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3491102.3517545 · DOI
  30. Yuhan Luo, Bongshin Lee, Donghee Yvette Wohn, Amanda L. Rebar, David E. Conroy, and Eun Kyoung Choe. 2018. Time for Break: Understanding Information Workers' Sedentary Behavior Through a Break Prompting System. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-14. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173701 · DOI
  31. Jon C. Messenger and Lutz Gschwind. 2016. Three generations of Telework: New ICTs and the (R)evolution from Home Office to Virtual Office. New Technology, Work and Employment 31, 3: 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12073 · DOI
  32. Hyanghee Park, Daehwan Ahn, Kartik Hosanagar, and Joonhwan Lee. 2021. Human-AI Interaction in Human Resource Management: Understanding Why Employees Resist Algorithmic Evaluation at Workplaces and How to Mitigate Burdens. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445304 · DOI
  33. Hyanghee Park, Daehwan Ahn, Kartik Hosanagar, and Joonhwan Lee. 2022. Designing Fair AI in Human Resource Management: Understanding Tensions Surrounding Algorithmic Evaluation and Envisioning Stakeholder-Centered Solutions. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '22), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517672 · DOI
  34. Sang-Min Park and Young-Gab Kim. 2022. A Metaverse: Taxonomy, Components, Applications, and Open Challenges. IEEE Access 10: 4209-4251. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140175 · DOI
  35. Scott Schieman, Philip J. Badawy, Melissa A. Milkie, and Alex Bierman. 2021. Work-Life Conflict During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Socius 7: 2378023120982856. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120982856 · DOI
  36. M. Joseph Sirgy and Dong-Jin Lee. 2018. Work-life balance: An integrative review. Applied Research in Quality of Life 13, 1: 229-254.
  37. Jaeyoon Song, Christoph Riedl, and Thomas W. Malone. 2021. Online Mingling: Supporting Ad Hoc, Private Conversations at Virtual Conferences. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-10. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445776 · DOI
  38. Frank Steinicke and Gerd Bruder. 2014. A self-experimentation report about long- term use of fully-immersive technology. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM symposium on Spatial user interaction, 66-69. https://doi.org/10.1145/2659766.2659767 · DOI
  39. John P. Trougakos, Nitya Chawla, and Julie M. McCarthy. 2020. Working in a pandemic: Exploring the impact of COVID-19 health anxiety on work, family, and health outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology 105, 11: 1234-1245. https: //doi.org/10.1037/apl0000739 · DOI
  40. Emily Tseng, Diana Freed, Kristen Engel, Thomas Ristenpart, and Nicola Dell. 2021. A Digital Safety Dilemma: Analysis of Computer-Mediated Computer Secu- rity Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '21), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445589 · DOI
  41. Lena Waizenegger, Brad McKenna, Wenjie Cai, and Taino Bendz. 2020. An af- fordance perspective of team collaboration and enforced working from home during COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems 29, 4: 429-442.
  42. Steve Whittaker. 2005. Supporting Collaborative Task Management in E-mail. Human-Computer Interaction 20, 1-2: 49-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024. 2005.9667361 · DOI
  43. Elizabeth Wilhoit Larson. 2021. Creating home at work: humanistic geography and placemaking in organizations. Culture and Organization 27, 6: 437-455. https: //doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2020.1861453 · DOI
  44. John R. Wilson and Mirabelle D'Cruz. 2006. Virtual and interactive environments for work of the future. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64, 3: 158-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.08.007 · DOI
  45. Jason C. Yip, Kiley Sobel, Xin Gao, Allison Marie Hishikawa, Alexis Lim, Laura Meng, Romaine Flor Ofiana, Justin Park, and Alexis Hiniker. 2019. Laughing is Scary, but Farting is Cute: A Conceptual Model of Children's Perspectives of Creepy Technologies. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -CHI '19, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300303 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Park, H., Ahn, D., & Lee, J.
Affiliations
  • Seoul National University (KR)
  • University of Georgia (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2023-04-19
Pages
1-20
DOI
10.1145/3544548.3581306
OpenAlex
W4366547539
Cited by
72
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 8
FWCI
15.55
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Facilities and Workplace Management
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
Keywords
remote work, hybrid work, virtual workspaces, workplace design, employee experience, COVID-19 pandemic, return to office, design implications

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