Advantages and disadvantages of video conferencing and direct interaction: a conceptual framework for evaluating hybrid work models

• Date: 25 April 2024
• Pages: 170-194
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-07-2023-0150
• Published date: 25 April 2024
• Subject Matter: Economics,Social economics
• Author: Marianne Thejls Ziegler,Christoph Lütge

Advantages and disadvantages of

video conferencing and direct

interaction: a conceptual

framework for evaluating hybrid

work models

Marianne Thejls Ziegler and Christoph Lütge

Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics, Technical University of Munich,

Munich, Germany

Abstract

Purpose –This study aims to analyse the differencesbetween professional interaction mediated by video

conferencing and directprofessional interaction. The research identif‌ies diverging interestsof off‌ice workers

for the purpose of addressing work ethical and business ethical issues of professional collaboration,

competition,and power in future hybrid work models.

Design/methodology/approach –Based on 28 qualitative interviews conducted between November

2020 and June 2021, and through the theoretical lens of phenomenology, the study develops explanatory

hypotheses conceptualising four basic intentions of professional interaction and their corresponding

preferencesfor video conferences and working on site.

Findings –The four intentionsdeveloped on the basis of the interviews are: the need for physical proximity;

the challenge of collective creativity; the will to inf‌luence; and control of communication. This conceptual

framework qualif‌ies a moral ambivalence of professional interaction. The authors identify a connectivity

paradox of professional interaction where the personal dimension remains unarticulated for the purpose of

maintaining professionality.This tacit human connectivity is intertwined with latent power relations.This

plasticity of both connectivity and power in direct interaction can be diminished by transferring the

interactionto video conferencing.

Originality/value –The application of phenomenology to a collection of qualitative interviews has

enabled the identif‌ication of underlyingintention structures and the system in which they affect each other.

This research identif‌iesconf‌licts of interests between workersrelative to their different self-perceived abilities

to persevere in competitive professional interaction. It is therefore able to address consequences of future

hybrid workmodels at an existential and societal level.

Keywords Video conferences, Flexible work arrangements (FWA), Work from home (WFH),

Mediated communication, Face-to-face communication, Organisational hierarchies, Phenomenology,

Intercorporeality, Professional interaction, Social isolation

Paper type Research paper

© Marianne Thejls Ziegler and Christoph Lütge. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This

article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may

reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and

non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full

terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

IJOES

41,1

170

Received6 July 2023

Revised3 December 2023

15January 2024

19March 2024

Accepted19 March 2024

InternationalJournal of Ethics and

Systems

Vol.41 No. 1, 2025

pp. 170-194

EmeraldPublishing Limited

2514-9369

DOI 10.1108/IJOES-07-2023-0150

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2514-9369.htm

1. Introduction: future hybrid work models

As the pandemic transferred off‌ice work to the realm of virtual professional interaction,

productivity was expected to fall. The transfer, however, worked out surprisingly well.

Employees were indeed capable of maintaining the same, if not even higher levels of

productivity while working from home (Barrero et al.,2021, p. 4). The apparent success of

this sudden transformationand the many practical advantages of replacing onsite meetings

with video conferences made a return to pre-pandemic requirements less likely. According

to surveys conducted during pandemic lockdowns, the majority of off‌ice workers would

prefer a f‌lexible work arrangement of no more than two to three off‌ice days per week.

Almost 60% of employees would prefer two days or less in the off‌ice (Lund et al.,2020;

Kunze et al., 2020;Strack et al., 2021). Some researchers have advised companies and

institutions to preparefor employee requirements. Accordingly, working:

[...] from home will be very much a part of our post-COVID economy. So the sooner policymakers

and business leaders think of the implications of a home-based workforce, the better our f‌irms and

communities will be positioned when the pandemic subsides (Bloom, 2020).

Simultaneously, a survey from 2021 (Microsoft’s Work Trend Index, 2022) indicates that

workers do appreciate onsite interaction. Accordingly: “73% of workers surveyed want

f‌lexible remote work options to continue, while at the same time, 67% are cravingmore in-

person time with theirteams”(2022, p. 4). Management would be challenged to satisfyboth.

Since the end of the pandemic, the public debate on pros and cons of work from home

(WHF) has continued. Questions of productivity and the potential conf‌lict of interest

between managers, who want workers to return to the off‌ice, and employees, who prefer

more f‌lexibility, have been explored with ambiguous conclusions (Tsipursky, 2022). The

prospect, that almost 60% of workers would spend two days or less in the off‌ice, not only

raises practical questions of productivityand the ethical issues of balancing the interests of

employees and leaders but the change in work culture would also challenge the very social

fabric of society.

Hybrid work models would reduce commuting and increase workers’f‌lexibility and

sense of autonomy (Caligiuri etal.,2020). Work persistently performed in solitude, however,

can lead to social isolation (Even, 2020). Creative processes, decision-making and

connectivity between people who meet for the f‌irst time tend to fade in video conferences,

and so does personal bonding, spontaneous exchange of knowledge and younger workers

learning from older and more experienced colleagues. (Cappelli, 2021). Cross-network

communication deteriorates when professional interaction is transferred from the physical

realm of off‌ices to that of video conferences (Yang et al.,2021). Hybrid work models

therefore raise questionsentangled in a web of pros and cons (Colbert et al.,2016).

Work affects individuals’sense of identity at a fundamental level (Honneth, 1995;

Arendt, 2018;Honneth, 2023). A substantial increase in WFH will affect therole of work in

the lives of off‌ice workers at a fundamental level, but it holds the risks of a professional,

existential and societal nature.Professional interaction enables the individual to leave home

and participate in formal processes of public life. The short-term convenience of working

from home can cause the marginalisation in relation to colleagues who are in situ in the

off‌ice and increases polarisation between highly paid off‌ice workers who can choose, and

those whose physical presenceis required (Bloom and Ramani, 2021). A signif‌icant decrease

in direct contact with fellow citizenscan weaken the role of work as key to participation in

public life and the experience of oneself as participating in society. At the societal level, a

signif‌icant reduction in the exposure to fellow citizens outside the immediate sociotope

Advantages and

disadvantages

of video

171