JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY
Department of Finance
Research Proposal on The Impact of Work-from-Home Policies on
Employee Productivity and Well-being Across Different Industries
Course Name:Research Methodology and Econometrics
Course Code: Fin-5104
Submitted to: Submitted by:
Hashibul Hassan Sharmin Jahan Sajia
Associate Professor Id:M220203039 Batch:13
Department of Finance MBA, 1st semester
Jagannath University, Dhaka. Department of Finance
Jagannath University, Dhaka.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 3
2. Research Question: ........................................................................................................................... 3
3. Literature Review ............................................................................................................................. 3
4. Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 4
5. Econometric Methods ....................................................................................................................... 6
6. Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 6
7. Expected contribution ...................................................................................................................... 6
7. Challenges and Limitations .............................................................................................................. 7
8. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 8
9. References .......................................................................................................................................... 9
1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly altered organizational operations, resulting in a
widespread shift to work-from-home (WFH) policies. This change has drawn considerable
attention from researchers, policymakers, and business leaders, who are interested in
understanding its effects on employee productivity and well-being. The rapid adoption of WFH
was necessary for maintaining business continuity while adhering to social distancing
measures, though its long-term impact remains debated. Remote work was already gaining
traction before the pandemic, supported by technological advancements and changing
workforce demographics. High-speed internet, cloud computing, and collaboration tools have
made remote work increasingly viable, while the emphasis on work-life balance and employee
well-being has prompted a reassessment of traditional office models.
However, WFH also presents challenges, such as blurred work-life boundaries leading to stress
and burnout, and reduced face-to-face interaction potentially hindering collaboration and
innovation. These challenges vary across industries, depending on the nature of the work and
the feasibility of remote tasks.
This research explores the impact of WFH policies on productivity and well-being across
different industries.
2. Research Question:
The question of this investigation is “What will be the impact of work-from-home policies
on employee productivity and well-being across different industries.”
2.1. Research Objectives
1. To assess the impact of WFH policies on employee productivity across different
industries.
2. To evaluate the effects of WFH on employee well-being.
3. To identify industry-specific factors that influence the effectiveness of WFH policies.
4. To provide policy recommendations for optimizing WFH arrangements.
3. Literature Review
Remote work has been extensively studied through various theoretical frameworks, notably the
Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and Self-Determination Theory (SDT). The JD-R
model suggests that job demands and resources play critical roles in influencing employee well-
being and productivity. Within this model, remote work is seen as a means to reduce job
demands, such as commuting stress, while simultaneously increasing resources like flexibility
and autonomy (Baker et al., 2007). SDT, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness in fostering intrinsic motivation and well-being, which
are potentially enhanced through Work From Home (WFH) arrangements (Gajendran &
Harrison, 2007).
The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to examine WFH on a large scale.
Bloom et al. (2015), in their randomized experiment in China, found that WFH led to a 13%
increase in productivity due to fewer breaks, reduced sick days, and a quieter work
environment. However, they also observed a decline in promotion rates for remote workers,
pointing to potential career progression challenges. Similarly, Choudhury et al. (2021)
investigated the productivity effects of geographic flexibility, revealing that employees who
could work from anywhere demonstrated higher productivity, highlighting the critical role of
flexibility in enhancing performance.
The impact of WFH is not uniform across industries, with significant variations observed based
on the sector’s digitalization level. Felstead and Henseke (2017) found that highly digitalized
sectors, such as IT and finance, experienced substantial productivity gains from WFH, owing
to their ability to effectively utilize digital tools for maintaining workflow and communication.
Conversely, industries requiring a physical presence, like manufacturing and healthcare, faced
considerable challenges in implementing WFH policies. These sectors rely heavily on hands-
on tasks and direct interactions, which are difficult to replicate remotely without affecting
productivity or service quality.
Kazekami (2020) further posited that the success of WFH depends largely on the nature of the
tasks involved. Routine and independent tasks are generally more suited to remote work, as
they require less supervision or collaboration. In contrast, tasks necessitating high levels of
collaboration and creativity might struggle in a remote setting due to the absence of
spontaneous face-to-face interactions, which are crucial for effective brainstorming and
problem-solving.
Employee well-being is another critical aspect of WFH. Grant et al. (2019) developed the e-
Work Life Scale to assess remote working’s impact on well-being, finding that WFH can
enhance work-life balance and reduce stress. Nevertheless, the lack of social interaction and
the blurring of work-life boundaries can lead to increased feelings of isolation and burnout
(Tavares, 2017). A meta-analysis by Harker Martin and MacDonnell (2012) found that
telework generally has a positive effect on job satisfaction and well-being, although outcomes
are contingent on individual preferences and the level of organizational support.
Despite these benefits, several challenges associated with WFH have been identified. Golden
and Veiga (2005) highlighted issues such as communication barriers, technological difficulties,
and the complexities of managing remote teams. However, they also noted that WFH presents
opportunities for organizations to attract and retain talent, reduce overhead costs, and enhance
employee satisfaction.
This review underscores the multifaceted nature of WFH, with its impact varying
significantly depending on industry characteristics, task nature, and the level of
organizational support. The literature suggests that while WFH can offer substantial benefits,
these must be balanced against potential drawbacks, particularly regarding employee well-
being and career progression.
4. Methodology
4.1 Data Source
Data will be collected through:
• Surveys: Distributed to employees across various industries to gather information on
productivity, well-being, and WFH experiences.
• Secondary Data: Industry reports, company performance metrics, and existing research
studies.
4.2. Econometric Approach
Multiple Regression Analysis: This technique will be used to examine the relationship between
WFH (as influenced by the independent variables) and productivity (dependent variable).
Multiple regression analysis will allow us to quantify the impact of each independent variable
while controlling for the effects of others.
4.3. Variables
Dependent Variables: Employee productivity and well-being.
Independent Variables: WFH policy implementation, industry type, job role, and other relevant
factors.
Control Variables: Age, gender, education level, years of experience, etc.
4.4. Regression Model Specification
Model 1: Impact of WFH on Productivity
Productivityit=α+β1WFHit+β2Industryi+β3JobRolei+γXit+ϵit
where:
(Productivity_{it}) is the productivity of employee (i) at time (t).
(WFH_{it}) is a binary variable indicating whether the employee is working from home.
(Industry_{i}) represents the industry type.
(JobRole_{i}) represents the job role.
(X_{it}) is a vector of control variables.
(\epsilon_{it}) is the error term.
Model 2: Impact of WFH on Well-being
WellBeingit=α+β1WFHit+β2Industryi+β3JobRolei+γXit+ϵit
where:
(WellBeing_{it}) is the well-being of employee (i) at the time (t).
5. Econometric Methods
5.1. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS)
• Purpose: To estimate the relationship between WFH policies and the dependent variables.
• Assumptions: Linearity, independence, homoscedasticity, and normality of residuals.
5.2. Fixed Effects (FE) Model
• Purpose: To control for unobserved heterogeneity by accounting for individual-specific
characteristics.
• Model:
Yit=αi+βWFHit+γXit+ϵit
where (\alpha_i) represents individual fixed effects.
5.3. Instrumental Variables (IV) Approach
• Purpose: To address potential endogeneity issues.
• Model:
Yit=α+βWFHit+γZit+ϵit , where (Z_{it}) is the instrumental variable.
6. Data Analysis
Detailing the steps below for analyzing the data :
Descriptive Statistics: Summarize the data to understand the distribution of variables.
Regression Analysis: Apply the specified regression models to estimate the impact of WFH
policies.
Robustness Checks: Conduct sensitivity analyses to ensure the reliability of results
7. Expected contribution
This research on the impact of work-from-home (WFH) policies on employee productivity and
well-being across different industries aims to make several significant contributions:
• The study will provide robust empirical evidence on the effects of WFH policies on
employee productivity and well-being. By employing econometric methods such as
Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Fixed Effects (FE) models, and Instrumental Variables (IV)
approaches, the research will offer a comprehensive analysis of how WFH arrangements
influence key performance indicators across various sectors.
• The research will highlight industry-specific differences in the effectiveness of WFH
policies. Understanding these variations will help organizations tailor their remote work
strategies to better suit the unique needs and characteristics of different industries. This will
be particularly valuable for sectors that have struggled to implement effective WFH
arrangements.
• Based on the findings, the study will provide actionable policy recommendations for
employers and policymakers. These recommendations will focus on optimizing WFH
policies to enhance employee productivity and well-being, addressing challenges such as
work-life balance, communication barriers, and technological support.
• The research will contribute to the theoretical understanding of remote work by integrating
insights from the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and Self-Determination Theory
(SDT). By examining how WFH policies affect job demands, resources, and intrinsic
motivation, the study will offer a nuanced perspective on the mechanisms through which
remote work influences employee outcomes.
• Organizations can leverage the findings to develop more effective WFH policies that
enhance employee satisfaction and performance. The study will provide evidence-based
strategies for managing remote teams, fostering collaboration, and maintaining employee
well-being in a remote work environment.
7. Challenges and Limitations
1. Data Collection:
Response Bias: Participants may give socially desirable answers, affecting data accuracy on
productivity and well-being.
Sample Representativeness: Some industries may be underrepresented, leading to biased
results.
Data Availability: Accessing reliable data, especially for smaller firms, can be difficult.
2. Measurement Issues:
Subjectivity: Self-reported data on well-being and productivity can be subjective and vary by
individual interpretation.
Standardization: Varying definitions of productivity across industries make standardization
challenging.
3. Econometric Limitations:
Endogeneity: Unobserved factors may influence both WFH policies and outcomes,
complicating analysis.
Fixed Effects Model: While controlling for unobserved heterogeneity, it omits time-invariant
factors.
4. Generalizability:
Industry-Specific: Results may not apply across different industries.
Cultural Differences: WFH impacts can vary by cultural context, limiting generalizability.
5. Longitudinal Data:
Short vs. Long-Term Effects: Studies may capture only short-term effects, missing long-
term impacts.
Attrition: Participant drop-out over time can lead to bias.
6. Technological Variability:
Access to Technology: Disparities in technology access affect WFH outcomes.
Organizational Support: Variability in support for remote work impacts effectiveness.
7. Psychological and Social Factors:
Isolation and Burnout: These are difficult to quantify and may not be fully captured.
Work-Life Balance: Blurring work and personal life can complicate well-being analysis.
8. Conclusion
It is anticipated that by using the aforementioned tactics, research on the effects of work-
from-home (WFH) rules on worker productivity and well-being in a range of businesses
would be fruitful. With the use of econometric techniques, such as multiple regression
analysis, the study seeks to offer practical insights and empirical support. Organizations will
benefit from the findings in terms of improved employee happiness, WFH strategy
optimization, and policy recommendations. In the end, this study will advance knowledge
about the impacts of remote work and direct future procedures in the changing workplace.
9. References
1. Baker, E., Avery, G. C., & Crawford, J. (2007). Satisfaction and perceived productivity
when professionals work from home. Research and Practice in Human Resource
Management, 15(1), 37-62.
2. Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2015). Does working from home work?
Evidence from a Chinese experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 165-218.
3. Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. (2021). Work-from-anywhere: The productivity
effects of geographic flexibility. Strategic Management Journal, 42(4), 655-683.
4. Felstead, A., & Henseke, G. (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.
5. Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about
telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524-1541.
6.Golden, T. D., & Veiga, J. F. (2005). The impact of extent of telecommuting on job
satisfaction: Resolving inconsistent findings. Journal of Management, 31(2), 301-318.
7. Grant, C. A., Wallace, L. M., Spurgeon, P. C., Tramontano, C., & Charalampous, M.
(2019). Construction and initial validation of the e-Work Life Scale to measure remote e-
working. Employee Relations, 41(1), 16-33.
8. Harker Martin, B., & MacDonnell, R. (2012). Is telework effective for organizations? A
meta-analysis of empirical research on perceptions of telework and organizational outcomes.
Management Research Review, 35(7), 602-616.
9. Kazekami, S. (2020). Mechanisms to improve labor productivity by performing telework.
Telecommunications Policy, 44(2), 101868.
10. Tavares, A. I. (2017). Telework and health effects review. International Journal of
Healthcare, 3(2), 30-36
