Teleworker's home office: an extension of corporate office?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review of the home offices of teleworkers employed by organizations in an attempt to understand the relationships between the design and physical conditions of home offices and teleworkers' work behaviours and to identify new areas of research around home offices. Design/methodology/approach An extensive review of the research literature in home working, teleworking, and conventional office settings from multiple disciplines was carried out. Findings This review has located no recent studies that focus on the design and conditions of home‐offices of teleworkers employed by organizations. The research on home working and on conventional offices suggests that teleworkers desire qualities in their home offices similar to those of conventional offices. Little is known about how the physical conditions of dwellings and family variables affect the effectiveness of home offices as a workplace. Research limitations/implications Little empirical research focused on home offices is available, so much more research is needed. Practical implications The design of home workspace must meet the needs of teleworkers and their families' home environment. The cost savings in corporate facilities must be balanced against the workplace needs of their employees. Originality/value The paper fills a gap in research about teleworking in home offices by integrating research from two related areas: homeworking and conventional office environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it