Employee Well-being in the Digital Age: A Study on Microsoft Teams Users
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71637/tnhj.v25i2.1060Keywords:
workplace technology, remote work, METUX model, self determination theory, Microsoft Teams, well-beingAbstract
Background: The use of technology, such as Microsoft Teams, became the new normal during the pandemic, especially in the IT and education sectors. Recognizing the effect of technology on users’ well-being, which, according to Self Determination Theory, is dependent on the fulfillment of their basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness), and how this effect may vary across different factors, this study compares basic psychological need satisfaction in Microsoft Teams users. Based on the Motivation, Engagement, and Thriving in User Experience Model, the levels of need satisfaction are compared across three user experience levels, also known as spheres (interface, task, and life). Further, comparisons are made based on the users’ profession (IT employees and college teachers), and the device type (smartphone, laptop, and desktop).
Method: A cross-sectional study of 120 Teams users was conducted to collect data. Mann Whitney U Test, Friedman Test, and Kruskal-Wallis H Test were employed for the comparisons, along with the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test and Mann Whitney U Test for post-hoc analysis, as needed.
Results: The results revealed significant differences in need satisfaction. Competence satisfaction surpassed autonomy and relatedness satisfactions in all three spheres. Further, IT employees experienced higher need satisfaction than teachers, and smartphone users experienced more need satisfaction than laptop users.
Conclusion: The study underlines the need for technology design that caters to different levels of user experience, professions, and device types, while providing Teams designers with valuable insights.
Downloads
References
1.Kniffin KM, Narayanan J, Anseel F, Antonakis J, Ashford SP, Bakker AB, et al. COVID-19 and the workplace: implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. Am Psychol. 2021;76(1):63–77.
2.Ng PML, Lit KK, Cheung CTY. Remote work as a new normal? The technology-organization-environment (TOE) context. Technol Soc. 2022 Aug; 70:102022.
3.Ropponen A. Remote work - the new normal needs more research. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2025 Mar 1;51(2):53–7.
4.Aksoy CG, Barrero JM, Bloom N, Davis SJ, Dolls M, Zarate P. Working from home around the world. Brookings Pap Econ Act. 2022;2022(2):281–360.
5.Bloom N, Han R, Liang J. Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance. Nature. 2024 Jun;630(8018):920–5.
6.Forbes. Remote work statistics [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 24]. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/in/business/remote-work-statistics/#source
7.Barrero JM, Bloom N, Davis SJ. Why working from home will stick. Natl Bur Econ Res Work Pap Ser. 2021;No. 28731.
8.Allen TD, Golden TD, Shockley KM. How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2015;16(2):40–68.
9.Lin IY, Kwantes CT. Potential job facilitation benefits of ‘water cooler’ conversations: the importance of social interactions in the workplace. J Psychol. 2015;149(3):239–62.
10.Battisti E, Alfiero S, Leonidou E. Remote working and digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic: economic–financial impacts and psychological drivers for employees. J Bus Res. 2022; 150:38–50.
11.Smite D, Moe NB, Hildrum J, Gonzalez-Huerta J, Mendez D. Work-from-home is here to stay: call for flexibility in post-pandemic work policies. J Syst Softw. 2023; 195:111552.
12.WFH Research. WFH research updates [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec]. Available from: https://wfhresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/WFHResearch_updates_December2024.pdf
13.HR Grapevine. Remote working survey shows limited employee appetite for return to office [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 7]. Available from: https://www.hrgrapevine.com/us/content/article/2025-03-07-remote-working-survey-shows-limited-employee-appetite-for-return-to-office
14.Future Forum. Summer 2022 Future Forum Pulse. Phnom Penh (KH): Future Forum; 2022.
15.Mukherjee S, Narang D. Digital economy and work-from-home: the rise of home offices amidst the COVID-19 outbreak in India. J Knowl Econ. 2023;14(2):924–45.
16.Herne A, Kollewe J. Many Google staff may never return to office full-time post-Covid. The Guardian [Internet]. 2020 Sep [cited 2025 Jan 21]. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/24/google-staff-return-office-full-time-homeworking-sundar-pichai
17.NeJhaddadgar N, Ziapour A, Zakkipour G, Abbas J, Abolfathi M, Shabani M. Effectiveness of telephone-based screening and triage during COVID-19 outbreak in the promoted primary healthcare system: a case study in Ardabil province, Iran. J Public Health. 2020;1(6):1–6.
18.Hopkins J, Bardoel A. The future is hybrid: how organisations are designing and supporting sustainable hybrid work models in post-pandemic Australia. Sustainability. 2023;15(4):3086.
19.Peters D, Calvo RA, Ryan RM. Designing for motivation, engagement and wellbeing in digital experience. Front Psychol. 2018;9:797.
20.Ryan RM, Deci EL. On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52(1):141–66.
21.PwC. Tech at work [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 24]. Available from: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/consulting/library/images/PwC_CIS-Tech-at-Work.pdf
22.Ragu-Nathan TS, Tarafdar M, Ragu-Nathan BS, Tu Q. The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: conceptual development and empirical validation. Inf Syst Res. 2008;19(4):417–33.
23.Powell GN, Greenhaus JH. Sex, gender, and the work-to-family interface: exploring negative and positive interdependencies. Acad Manage J. 2010;53(3):513–34.
24.Wang Z, Chen X, Duan Y. Communication technology use for work at home during off-job time and work–family conflict: the roles of family support and psychological detachment. An Psicol. 2017;33(1):93–101.
25.Green N, Tappin D, Bentley T. Working from home before, during and after the Covid-19 pandemic: implications for workers and organisations. N Z J Employ Relat. 2020;45(2):5–16.
26.Enaifoghe A, Zenzile N. The rapidly evolving situation of employee work-from-home productivity and the integration of ICT in post-COVID-19 pandemic. Sci Afr. 2023;20:e01709.
27.Rennecker J, Godwin L. Delays and interruptions: a self-perpetuating paradox of communication technology use. Inf Organ. 2005;15(3):247–66.
28.Jaiswal A, Arun CJ. Working from home during COVID-19 and its impact on Indian employees’ stress and creativity. Asian Bus Manag. 2022;21:1–25.
29.Yao S, Lu J, Wang H, Montgomery JJW, Gorny T, Ogbonnaya C. Excessive technology use in the post-pandemic context: how work connectivity behavior increases procrastination at work. Inf Technol People. 2023;37(2):583–604.
30.Garfin DR. Technology as a coping tool during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic: implications and recommendations. Stress Health. 2020;36(4):555–9.
31.Molino M, et al. Wellbeing costs of technology use during Covid-19 remote working: an investigation using the Italian translation of the technostress creators scale. Sustainability. 2020;12(15):5911.
32.Gupta M, Hassan Y, Pandey J, Kushwaha A. Decoding the dark shades of electronic human resource management. Int J Manpow. 2022;43(1):12–31.
33.Mann S, Holdsworth L. The psychological impact of teleworking: stress, emotions and health. New Technol Work Employ. 2003;18(3):196–211.
34.De Jong BA, Dirks KT, Gillespie N. Trust and team performance: a meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(8):1134–50.
35.Lal B, Dwivedi YK, Haag M. Working from home during Covid-19: doing and managing technology-enabled social interaction with colleagues at a distance. Inf Syst Front. 2023;25(4):1333–50.
36.Deci EL, Ryan RM. The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq. 2000;11(4):227–68.
37.Deci EL. Intrinsic motivation. New York (NY): Plenum Press; 1975.
38.Deci EL, Ryan RM. The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1987;53(6):1024–37.
39.Skinner EA. Perceived control, motivation, and coping. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1995.
40.Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-Determination Theory: basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York (NY): Guilford Publications; 2017.
41.Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull. 1995;117(3):497–529.
42.Colbert A, Yee N, George G. The digital workforce and the workplace of the future. Acad Manage J. 2016;59:731–9.
43.Klassen RM, Perry NE, Frenzel AC. Teachers’ relatedness with students: an underemphasized component of teachers’ basic psychological needs. J Educ Psychol. 2012;104(1):150–65.
44.Barnabé C, Burns M. Teachers’ job characteristics and motivation. Educ Res. 1994;36(2):171–85.
45.Kirjakovski A. Rethinking perception and cognition in the digital environment. Front Cogn. 2023;2:1266404.
46.Hakami E, El Aadmi-Laamech K, Hakami L, Santos P, Hernández-Leo D, Amarasinghe I. Students’ basic psychological needs satisfaction at the interface level of a computer-supported collaborative learning tool. In: International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Social Computing; 2022 Oct. Cham: Springer International Publishing; p. 218–30.
47.Martin BC, Pathak DS, Sharfman MI, Adelman JU, Taylor F, Kwong WJ, et al. Validity and reliability of the migraine‐specific quality of life questionnaire (MSQ Version 2.1). Headache. 2000;40(3):204–16.
48.Kriwy P, Mecking RA. Health and environmental consciousness, costs of behaviour and the purchase of organic food. Int J Consum Stud. 2012;36(1):30–7.
49.Taber KS. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48:1273–96.
50.Wendt HW. Dealing with a common problem in social science: a simplified rank-biserial coefficient of correlation based on the U statistic. Eur J Soc Psychol. 1972;2(4):4635.
51.Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
52.Fritz CO, Morris PE, Richler JJ. Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012;141(1):2–18.
53.Trust T, Whalen J. Should teachers be trained in emergency remote teaching? lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. J Technol Teach Educ. 2020;28(2):189–99.
54.Demeshkant N, Potyrała K, Tomczyk L. Levels of academic teachers digital competence: Polish case-study. In: International Conference on Computers in Education; 2020 Nov. p. 591–601.
55.Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos V, Matarranz M, Casado-Aranda LA, et al. Teachers’ digital competencies in higher education: a systematic literature review. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2022;19:8.
56.Wang W, Reani M. The rise of mobile computing for group decision support systems: a comparative evaluation of mobile and desktop. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2017;104:16–35.
57.Maurer ME, Hausen D, De Luca A, Hussmann H. Mobile or desktop websites? website usage on multitouch devices. In: Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries; 2010. p. 739–42.
58.Hung CL, Chou JCL, Ding CM. Enhancing mobile satisfaction through integration of usability and flow. Eng Manag Res. 2012;1(1):44.
59.Tsai HH, Cheng CY, Shieh WY. Effectiveness of laptop-based versus smartphone-based videoconferencing interaction on loneliness, depression and social support in nursing home residents: a secondary data analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2023 Apr;29(3):177–86.
60.Carfì A, Mastrogiovanni F. Gesture-based human–machine interaction: taxonomy, problem definition, and analysis. IEEE Trans Cybern. 2023;53(1):497–513.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 M Asha, N. Ajith Kumar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Journal is owned, published and copyrighted by the Nigerian Medical Association, River state Branch. The copyright of papers published are vested in the journal and the publisher. In line with our open access policy and the Creative Commons Attribution License policy authors are allowed to share their work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author.
The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations. While the advice and information in this journal are believed to be true and accurate on the date of its going to press, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
TNHJ also supports open access archiving of articles published in the journal after three months of publication. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g, in institutional repositories or on their website) within the stated period, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). All requests for permission for open access archiving outside this period should be sent to the editor via email to editor@tnhjph.com.
