Consequences of Remote Work Use and Intensity: A Meta-Analysis

The large-scale shift to remote work on the heels of the COVID-19 has led to a realization by many organizations that remote work could be a long-term arrangement for their employees. Yet, we have an incomplete understanding about the consequences of remote work for employees. A prior meta-analysis (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007) conducted over a decade ago surveyed only 46 studies and hence was limited in its scope. Since then, the corpus of literature on remote work has grown significantly. We conducted a meta-analysis on remote work that includes 111 studies (k = 114, N = 303,449). This meta-analysis seeks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the consequences of remote work by focusing on not only remote work use (remote workers compared to office-based workers) but also remote work intensity (extensiveness of remote working). We find that remote workers (versus office-based workers) have higher perceived autonomy, supervisor-rated performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and engagement, while also having lower turnover intentions. Further, remote work intensity enhances perceived autonomy and supervisor-rated performance, and improves job and life satisfaction. In terms of mechanisms, the effects of both remote work use and remote work intensity on work- and nonwork-related outcomes come about via perceived autonomy. In contrast to prior theorizing, we find no evidence that remote work leads to impoverished workplace relationships. Likewise, it had no effects on work-family conflict. Overall, our study clarifies the nature of relationships linking remote work to important individual and organizational outcomes, enhancing our understanding of this work arrangement.