Resistance to change: implementing smart working in Italian public administrations
Keywords:
Human Resource Management, Public administrations, Resistance to change, Smart working, Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology modelAbstract
This research explores the opportunities and challenges of smart working in Italian public administration. Using the UTAUT model by Venkatesh et al. (2003), we analyze technological barriers and the impact of regulations on decision-making. We present two case studies of Italian public administrations under different ministries, where smart working adoption varies. One represents a typical case where remote work is possible, while the other is a deviant case where it is not. From a theoretical point of view, our results extend the Venkatesh model by contextualizing it to the Italian reality, and provide important insights in the Human Resource Management area. Our findings reveal that the nonadoption of smart working is not solely a technological issue but is significantly influenced by cultural barriers, such as distrust between managers and employees, as well as a perceived loss of managerial control. While employees are generally eager to embrace smart working to enhance work-life balance and productivity, these cultural barriers create resistance within organizations, and increase employees' turnover intentions. The practical contribution of the research is to provide policy-makers with the necessary tools to establish a labor law framework that highlights the efficiencies and inefficiencies emphasized within the specific contingencies of public administrations.
References
Arduini, S., Manzo, M., & Beck, T. (2023). Corporate reputation and culture: the link between knowledge management and sustainability. Journal of Knowledge Ma-nagement.
Aziz-Ur-Rehman, M., & Siddiqui, D. A. (2019). Relationship between flexible working arrangements and job satisfaction mediated by work-life balance: Evidence from public sector universities employees of Pakistan. Available at SSRN 3510918.
Bae, K. B., Lee, D., & Sohn, H. (2019). How to increase participation in telework programs in US federal agencies: Examining the effects of being a female supervi-sor, supportive leadership, and diversity management. Public Personnel Manage-ment, 48(4), 565-583.
Cannito, M., & Scavarda, A. (2020). Childcare and remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideal worker model, parenthood and gender inequalities in Italy. Italian Sociological Review, 10(3S), 801-801.
Carraher-Wolverton, C. (2022). The co-evolution of remote work and expectations in a COVID-19 world utilizing an expectation disconfirmation theory lens. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 24(1), 55-69.
Cellini, M., Pisacane, L., Crescimbene, M., & Di Felice, F. (2021). Exploring em-ployee perceptions towards smart working during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of two Italian public research organizations. Public Organizati-on Review, 21(4), 815-833.
Charalampous, M., Grant, C. A., Tramontano, C., & Michailidis, E. (2019). System-atically reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: A multidimensional ap-proach. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 28(1), 51-73.
Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., & Vrontis, D. (2022). Does remote work flexibility enhance organization performance? Moderating role of organization policy and top management support. Journal of Business Research, 139, 1501-1512.
Chiaro, G., Prati, G., & Zocca, M. (2015). Smart working: dal lavoro flessibile al la-voro agile. Smart working: dal lavoro flessibile al lavoro agile, 69-87
Cuel, R., Aurelio, R., & Luisa, V. (2021). Lo smart working nelle pubbliche ammi-nistrazioni: Un’analisi socio-tecnica del fenomeno. Prospettive in Organizzazio-ne, 2021(14).
Datta, P. (2020). Digital Transformation of the Italian Public Administration: A Case Study. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 46, pp-pp.
Datta, P., Walker, L., & Amarilli, F. (2020). Digital transformation: Learning from Italy’s public administration. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 10(2), 54-71.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user ac-ceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
De Masi, D. (2020). Smart working: La rivoluzione del lavoro intelligente. Marsilio Editori spa.
Delfino, G. F., & Van Der Kolk, B. (2021). Remote working, management control changes and employee responses during the COVID-19 crisis. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(6), 1376-1387.
Den Dulk, L., & Groeneveld, S. (2013). Work–life balance support in the public sec-tor in Europe. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 33(4), 384-405.
Denzin N. (2012). The research act in sociology. London: Butterworths.
Dubey, A. D., & Tripathi, S. (2020). Analysing the sentiments towards work-from-home
Durose, C. (2009). Front‐line workers and ‘local knowledge’: Neighbourhood stories in contemporary UK local governance. Public administration, 87(1), 35-49.
Ellerton, S. (2015). Smart working-creating the next wave. Leadership & Organiza-tion Development Journal, 36(7), 903-904.
experience during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Innovation Management, 8(1), 13-19.
Felstead, A., Jewson, N., Phizacklea, A. and Walters, S. .2002. Opportunities to work at home in the context of work-life balance. Human Resource Management Journal, 12: 54- 76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2002.tb00057.x
Galanti, T., Guidetti, G., Mazzei, E., Zappalà, S., & Toscano, F. (2021). Work from home during the COVID-19 outbreak: The impact on employees’ remote work productivity, engagement, and stress. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 63(7), e426-e432.
Hochschild, A. R. 1997. When work becomes home and home becomes work. Cali-fornia Management Review, 39(4), 79.
Irawanto, D. W., Novianti, K. R., & Roz, K. 2021. Work from home: Measuring sat-isfaction between work–life balance and work stress during the COVID-19 pandem-ic in Indonesia. Economies, 9(3), 96.
Knardahl, S., & Christensen, J. O. (2022). Working at home and expectations of be-ing available: effects on perceived work environment, turnover intentions, and health. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 48(2), 99.
Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis.
Massa, N., Santarpia, F. P., & Consiglio, C. (2023, July). Work characteristics as de-terminants of remote working acceptance: integrating UTAUT and JD-R models. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 163-180). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Miles, Matthew B. and A. Michael Huberman 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Ozcelik, H., & Barsade, S. G. (2018). No employee an island: Workplace loneliness and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(6), 2343-2366.
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the nutri-tion society, 63(4), 655-660.
Sahut, J. M., & Lissillour, R. (2023). The adoption of remote work platforms after the Covid-19 lockdown: New approach, new evidence. Journal of business rese-arch, 154, 113345.
Scott, D. M., Dam, I., Páez, A., & Wilton, R. D. (2012). Investigating the effects of social influence on the choice to telework. Environment and Planning A, 44(5), 1016-1031.
Shamsi, M., Iakovleva, T., Olsen, E., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2021). Employees’ work-related well-being during COVID-19 pandemic: An integrated perspective of tech-nology acceptance model and JD-R theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 11888.
Stavrova, O., Spiridonova, T., van de Calseyde, P., Meyers, C., & Evans, A. M. (2023). Does remote work erode trust in organizations? A within‐person investiga-tion in the COVID‐19 context. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(7), e12762.
Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2(17-37), 25.
Todisco, L., Mangia, G., Canonico, P., & Tomo, A. (2022). Effects of COVID-19 on public administration: smart working as an organizational revolution. HR Analy-tics and Digital HR Practices: Digitalization post COVID-19, 51-72.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.
Vigoda‐Gadot, E. R. A. N., & Meiri, S. (2008). New public management values and person‐organization fit: A socio‐psychological approach and empirical examination among public sector personnel. Public administration, 86(1), 111-131.
Yin, R. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5th ed.). Thousand O-aks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work for non-commercial use with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors and IPMR are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository, distribute it via EBSCO, or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
