Working from home and digital technology may be making it easier for employees to work while ill and blurring the boundaries between work and home, according to a new study.
The paper, by Professor Sir Cary Cooper of The University of Manchester, Professor Luo Lu of National Taiwan University and Professor Shu-Fang Kao of Soochow University, argues that traditional definitions of presenteeism no longer reflect the realities of modern working life.
Working from home doesn’t mean switching off
The researchers say the widespread adoption of remote and hybrid working means many employees no longer need to physically go into the workplace to do their jobs while unwell. Instead, they can remain at home, respond to emails or messages, attend virtual meetings or carry out urgent tasks while ill.
The study argues that this creates new challenges for understanding the impact of an increasingly ‘always-on’ workplace culture.
Key findings
- Presenteeism is no longer simply about going into work while sick – people can now work while unwell from home or elsewhere.
- Digital technology can make it harder to switch off, with employees potentially feeling pressure to remain available through email, messaging platforms and other workplace technology even outside normal working hours.
- Mental health needs to be recognised alongside physical illness when considering why people work while unwell, as existing research has focused heavily on physical sickness.
- Working while ill can take different forms – from completing a normal working day remotely to doing only urgent tasks or checking emails intermittently.
- Employers should consider whether workers have flexibility to reduce their hours or workload when ill, rather than treating working while sick as an inherently good or bad behaviour.
Presenteeism is no longer just about physical presence
The researchers propose redefining presenteeism as the “behaviour of attending work in the state of suboptimal health, with varied location choices and degree of engagement”.
This means that presenteeism should be understood not simply in terms of whether someone turns up to work, but also where they work, what health problem they are experiencing and how much effort they put into working.
The authors argue that existing approaches to measuring presenteeism are too narrow because they generally focus on how often people go to work despite being ill, or on the extent to which illness affects their productivity. Instead, they propose a three-dimensional framework based on health, location and engagement.
Eight ways of working while unwell
The first dimension considers whether presenteeism is triggered by a physical or mental health problem. The second considers whether someone works on-site or remotely. The third considers whether they work a full schedule with normal levels of engagement or reduce their hours and effort. Together, these dimensions produce eight different forms of presenteeism.
For example, an employee with a physical illness might go into the workplace and work a full day, while another might stay at home and only deal with urgent requests. Someone experiencing anxiety or depression could similarly work either remotely or on-site, with either full or reduced engagement.
The researchers say this approach could help distinguish between situations where working while ill may be harmful and situations where employees are able to adapt their work in ways that allow them to protect their health while meeting essential responsibilities.
The paper also highlights concerns about inequality in access to flexible working. Remote working is not available to everyone, meaning that some workers may be able to adapt their working arrangements when ill while others have little choice but to attend their workplace.
What the experts say
“The world of work has changed dramatically, but our understanding of what it means to work while sick has not necessarily kept pace with this transformation,” said Professor Cary Cooper, 50th Anniversary Professor of Organisational Psychology and Health at The University of Manchester. “Technology has given people much greater flexibility over where and when they work, but that flexibility can become a trap if employees feel they have to be available all the time.”
Making flexibility work for employees
The authors argue that future research should examine whether giving employees greater control over their location, working hours and workload can make presenteeism a more adaptive behaviour. They also call for greater attention to mental health-related presenteeism, which they say has been relatively neglected by existing research.
The researchers stress that working while sick should not automatically be regarded as either positive or negative. Instead, they argue that understanding how someone works while unwell – and the circumstances surrounding that decision – is essential to understanding its effects on health and performance.
The paper concludes that organisations need to strike a balance between maintaining performance and protecting employee wellbeing as digital technology continues to reshape the workplace.
Publication details
The paper was published in journal Health Psychology Research.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36922/HPR026130066
