This article was downloaded by: [George Mason University]On: 07 January 2013, At: 10:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Southern Communication JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsjc20

The Influence of InformalCommunication on OrganizationalIdentification and Commitment in theContext of High-Intensity TelecommutingMartha J. Fay a & Susan L. Kline ba Department of Communication and Journalism, University ofWisconsinEau Claireb School of Communication, Ohio State UniversityVersion of record first published: 18 Jan 2012.

To cite this article: Martha J. Fay & Susan L. Kline (2012): The Influence of Informal Communicationon Organizational Identification and Commitment in the Context of High-Intensity Telecommuting,Southern Communication Journal, 77:1, 61-76

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1041794x.2011.582921

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

The Influence of InformalCommunication on OrganizationalIdentification and Commitmentin the Context of High-IntensityTelecommutingMartha J. Fay & Susan L. Kline

The relationship between types of informal coworker communication and organizational

identification and commitment is tested in the context of high-intensity telecommuting.

Teleworkers recalled interactions in which they felt included or excluded, and responses

were coded for integration of teleworkers relational and identity aims with organizational

goals. Inclusion message level, exclusion message level, and coworker social support pre-

dicted teleworkers level of organizational identification and commitment; collegial talk

was weakly associated. The quality of the relationship teleworkers had with the coworker

they interacted with the most moderated the effect of exclusion messages on identification

and commitment, but the general quality of coworker relationships was not a moderator.

Distributed work arrangements are now viewed as an efficient way for businesses to

reduce costs, expand their geographic representation, and improve employee morale,

with the result that telecommuting is projected to increase 20% annually (Bureau of

Labor Statistics, 2008; WorldatWork, 2009). Despite the growth in telecommuting,

researchers have identified challenges for the virtual work form, particularly for

high-intensity teleworkers, or those who work away from their central offices more

than two days a week (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). In particular, high-intensity

Martha J. Fay, Department of Communication and Journalism, University of WisconsinEau Claire;

Susan L. Kline, School of Communication, Ohio State University. Correspondence to: Martha J. Fay,

Department of Communication and Journalism, University of WisconsinEau Claire, 105 Garfield

Avenue, Eau Claire, WI 54703. E-mail: faym@uwec.edu

Southern Communication Journal

Vol. 77, No. 1, JanuaryMarch 2012, pp. 6176

ISSN 1041-794X (print)/1930-3203 (online)

# 2012 Southern States Communication Association. DOI: 10.1080/1041794x.2011.582921

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

teleworkers are theorized to experience greater difficulties developing feelings of

loyalty and attachment to their organizations, which affects other valued organizational

outcomes like turnover and job satisfaction. Yet, social interaction and communication

are important for constructing feelings of organizational identification (OI) and com-

mitment (OC) (Ashforth, Harrison, & Corley, 2008; Cheney, Christensen, & Larson,

2001; Fay & Kline, 2011). Responding to the call for specific research on high-intensity

teleworkers (e.g., Bartel, Wrzesniewski, & Wiesenfeld, 2007; Ellison, 2004; Thatcher &

Zhu, 2006), we contend that specific types of informal coworker communication

should be associated with high-intensity teleworkers feelings of organizational identi-

fication and commitment. We advance our hypotheses after reviewing (a) remote work

issues relevant to OI and OC and (b) forms of informal communication that may be

associated with teleworkers OI and OC.

Challenges for Organizational Identification and Commitment in Telework

Telecommuting, one form of virtual work (Rock & Pratt, 2002), involves employees

performing at least part of their responsibilities remotely, outside their central orga-

nizations physical boundaries using technology to interact (Gajendran & Harrison,

2007; Thatcher & Zhu, 2006). In a first meta-analysis, Gajendran and Harrison found

that teleworkers had higher autonomy and job satisfaction and lower levels of

work-family conflict and turnover intentions than those who did not telecommute.

However, high-intensity telecommuters reported increased work-family conflict,

more negative coworker relationships, and more feelings of isolation than those

who telecommuted less (see Golden, Veiga, & Dino, 2008).

Recently, researchers have theorized that a managerial challenge of high-intensity

teleworkers is to ensure they can develop feelings of identification and commitment

toward their organizations (Golden, 2006a; Thatcher & Zhu, 2006). Organizational

identification is the process by which the goals of the organization and those of

the individual become increasingly integrated or congruent (Hall & Schneider,

1972, p. 176; Hall, Schneider, & Nygren, 1970), while organizational commitment

is the individuals desire to maintain organizational membership, accept the organi-

zations goals, and put forth effort for the good of the organization (Hogg, Terry, &

White, 1995).

Several sets of researchers have theorized that challenges in developing identifi-

cation and commitment toward ones organization are magnified in remote work.

Rock and Pratt (2002), for instance, have theorized that working remotely is likely

to lower the salience of work identity for employees whose OI is high. Thatcher and

Zhu (2006) have contended that teleworkers work-related identities are challenged

because their reduced visibility and face-to-face communication opportunities affect

the way they develop and verify the work self-concepts involved in OI and OC.

Temporal and spatial distance reduces opportunities for teleworkers to interact with

colleagues and provides less access to organizational routines that are sources for

connection and understanding (see DeSanctis & Monge, 1998). This may result in

teleworkers fears of being excluded and not belonging (Morgan & Symon, 2002).

62 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

The co-constructed nature of identity suggests that interpersonal communication

may play a significant role in overcoming issues with distance and absence of social

cues in remote work (OKeefe & Shepherd, 1989; Pittam, 1999). Using constructivist

communication theory (OKeefe & Delia, 1982, 1988), senses of mutual understand-

ing are viewed as created through meaning construction processes and activities.

Social actors use resources relevant to processes, like common ground and aligning

acts, to develop identities, to elaborate situational definitions, and to accomplish

multiple aims. Messages that integrate teleworkers identity aims with their organiza-

tions aims may facilitate OI and OC, as such messages may verify to teleworkers that

they are seen by the organization as credible valued members (Thatcher & Zhu,

2006), thereby facilitating positive regard or self-enhancement (Bartel et al., 2007).

Hence, organizational identification and commitment should be related to informal

communication because each is enacted and=or reproduced in interaction (Shotter &Cunliffe, 2003; Weick, 1979).

For instance, constructivist theory (OKeefe & Delia,1982) and, in particular, the

constructivist concept of message integration can be used to distinguish between

the way organizational messages can be inclusive for employees through the way

messages between employees can integrate their task, relational, and identity goals,

together with the organizations aims and image. In similar fashion, messages can

be distinguished for their level of exclusion, or the way messages can fracture the unity

of the individual and the organization, thereby preventing the integration of individ-

ual goals with the goals of the organization. For example, we posit that exclusion mes-

sages can vary from descriptions of error or oversight with the organizations role as

incidental, to messages that see the organization as a context preventing identification

or ownership in the organization. Exclusion messages can also include those that

actively reject employees relational, task, and=or identity goals within organizationalcontexts that appear impermeable to employee involvement. Inclusion messages could

vary between achieving basic relationship goals grounded in normal conventions to

complex messages in which employees task, relational, and identity goals are directly

and mutually pursued within a broader collaborative context and embedded within

the organization with implications for the organizations identity.

Informal Communication in the Telecommuting Context

Informal communication in work settings is interpersonal, social, or small talk that is

not solely work-task focused (Holmes, 2000). Informal relations constitute an impor-

tant integrating process in the organization (Blau, 2000) and an interactional region in

which employees needs are met, social identities formed, commonalities established,

and meaningful relationships formed (DeSanctis & Monge, 1998; Sias & Cahill, 1998).

Informal communication creates opportunities for teleworkers to present themselves

as credible actors who want interpersonal relationships with coworkers (Thatcher &

Zhu, 2006). Supporting this reasoning, Weisenfeld and colleagues found that higher

frequency of teleworkers informal e-mail interactions was positively associated with

their OI (Wiesenfeld, Raghuram, & Garud, 1999). In a more focused analysis, Fay

Telecommuting 63

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

and Kline (2011) found that satisfaction with informal communication was positively

associated with teleworkers OC. In addition, Bartel et al. (2007) theorized that OI is

an interpersonal process that involves membership claiming and granting, a process

that is more constrained for remote employees (p. 120) because they have fewer

opportunities to be involved in ongoing discussions.

This contextual variant makes salient the constructivist focus on reality as socially

constructed and reconstructed (OKeefe, Delia, & OKeefe, 1980). When people

communicate, they are actively, creatively, and dynamically designing and revising

reality. Communication is examined as situational and social; focusing on informal

communication allows both aspects to emerge. Because communication is structured,

organized, and goal oriented, there is meaning and importance in even the simplest

of communication routines (Zimmerman & Applegate, 1994).

Constructivists further hold that people use interpretive schemes as general classify-

ing devices for grouping constructs, with regard to context and other constructs.

Individuals are able to coordinate activities through shared schemes, which serve as

resources through which coordination is made possible. Hence, interpretive schemes,

which channelize behavioral alternatives, are applied based on the situation, the context,

and other particulars (OKeefe, Delia, & OKeefe, 1980). OKeefe, Delia, and OKeefe

have explicated how interactional segments are local, hierarchical, and historically

emergent; this view allows consideration of everyday interactions as simultaneously

influencing and being influenced by the larger organizational processes, including OI.

Researchers have begun to examine teleworkers everyday communication

practices in relation to OI. Hylmo and Buzzanell (2002) found that teleworkers

experienced the loss of informal interaction and opportunities to develop relation-

ships with new employees, while Brockelhurst (2001) found that teleworkers recre-

ated their identities in their new office routines. Bartel et al. (2007) more closely

integrated both concepts, finding that teleworkers membership claims and grants

were positively related to their level of OI.

Using constructivist theory (OKeefe & Delia, 1982, 1988), informal communication

that legitimizes and integrates members perspectives and goals with the organizations

goals would likely facilitate teleworkers feelings of identification and commitment

toward their organizations. Such communication forms would make salient telewor-

kers identities, affirm their relationships with coworkers and integrate their identities

with organizational goals, attributes, and interests. Following this reasoning, several

types of informal coworker communication may be associated with OI and OC in

remote work: inclusion messages, exclusion messages, collegial talk, and social support.

One form of remote workers informal communication that may be associated

with OI and OC is the inclusion messages teleworkers can experience from coworkers.

Schutz (1966) defined inclusion as the need to establish and maintain satisfactory

relationships with people with respect to interaction and association (p. 18); being

included in others work tasks and feeling a sense of belonging is related to employee

job performance (Pearce & Randel, 2004).

Presumably, inclusion messages that legitimate and situate teleworkers identity

attributes in relation to the organizations aims, andmessages that acclaim the identities

64 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

and values exemplified by teleworkers, should invite them to elaborate their constructs

and value their organizational membership, which, in turn, should likely be associated

with OI and OC. By contrast, message forms that ignore, dismiss, or actively reject

teleworkers aims deny the legitimacy of teleworkers perspectives and display greater

separation of the teleworkers aims from the organizations aims. Messages of rejection

that separate teleworkers from coworkers or the organization would be viewed as exclu-

sionary and not associated with OI and OC.

Collegial talk practices with coworkers may also be associated with teleworkers OI

and OC. Talk that functions to do collegiality (Holmes, 2003, p. 66) expresses

friendliness, solidarity, and cooperative working relations. Holmes (2003) argued that

informal social talk practices are the social glue of the workplace (p. 5), and the

means through which people enact their organizations interaction norms and create

cooperative relations (Holmes & Marra, 2004). Absent the physical cues and face-to-

face talk rituals that are key sources for developing common ground, teleworkers may

benefit from collegial talk by establishing understandings that facilitate work activities

(e.g., DeSanctis & Monge, 1998; Robichaud, Giroux, & Taylor, 2004). Coworkers and

teleworkers display mutual knowledge of each other in such talk, which can enable

teleworkers to construct credible identities and friendly relations that may help

maintain a sense of belonging and loyalty.

Finally, coworker social supportmay be associated with OI andOC in telecommuting,

through providing assistance to others and reappraisals that restore confidence and

personal control (Burleson & MacGeorge, 2002). Social support also serves as a

resource for ones identity by providing feelings of attachment to others (Hobfoll,

Freedy, Lane, & Geller, 1990). This study conceptualizes social support as both task

and relational and accomplished through communication (Burleson & MacGeorge,

2002). Chiaburu and Harrisons (2008) meta-analysis showed that coworkers who

experience affective and instrumental support are significantly more committed toward

their organizations, while Wiesenfeld, Raghuram, and Garud (2001) found that new

teleworkers who receive social support feel more identified with their organizations.

Using constructivist reasoning, then, coworker social support is more likely to be

associated with teleworkers OI and OC when message forms legitimize teleworkers

desires and feelings and integrate them with their organizations goals. At the same

time, social support is also likely to enact relationships with coworkers that foster

belonging and acceptance. In general, coworker-relationship quality is conceived of

as including trust, liking, and relationship satisfaction (Muchinsky, 1977).

Hypotheses and the Moderating Role of Coworker-Relationship Quality

The relationship between specific forms of informal communication, coworker-

relationship quality, OI, and OC has not been examined in the remote work context.

So given our review and reasoning we hypothesized:

H1ae: Informal communication in the form of (a) inclusion messages, (b) col-legial talk, (c) social support, and (d) specific coworker-relationship qualitybetween teleworkers and their coworkers will be positively associated with

Telecommuting 65

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

OI and OC; while (e) exclusion messages experienced by teleworkers will benegatively associated with OI and OC.

Given that high-intensity teleworkers tend to feel isolated, excluded, and uncertain

about their relationships with their central organization, the experience of exclusion

messages from their organizations and its members may particularly affect telewor-

kers feelings of identification and commitment. Exclusion messages may especially

decrease teleworkers job attitudes and performance if they already feel disconnected

from coworkers who could correct misperceptions or if they lack a coworker or

coworkers to buffer the effects of feeling excluded.

Our second and third hypotheses test the moderating role of coworker-

relationship quality on the expected associations of exclusion messages to OI and

OC. The moderator role of coworker relationships is based on findings on the impact

of strong ties on communication and relationships, in which having a good friend,

supervisor, or mentor can moderate the effects of problematic situations on a variety

of outcomes (e.g., Fox & Boulton, 2006; Payne & Huffman, 2005). Having a person

to confide in and interact with frequently in a trusting relationship may moderate the

negative effects of exclusion messages on teleworkers OI and OC.

However, another form of the moderator role of coworker-relationship quality

comes from findings on the effects of coworker relationships in general or coworker-

relationship climate (Chiaburu & Harrison, 2008). In this view, the perception of

having quality relationships with coworkers in general should buffer the effects of

exclusion messages on teleworkers feelings of identification and commitment

(Golden, 2006b). Given the empirical support for each viewpoint, we tested them both:

H23: The relationship between teleworkers exclusion message level and organiza-tional identification and commitment is moderated by (H2) the quality ofthe relationship teleworkers have with the coworker they interact with mostfrequently and (H3) the supportive communication teleworkers have withtheir coworkers.

Method

Participants

Participants were full-time, organizationally affiliated employees who worked

remotely at least three business days each week from their central offices (Gajendran

& Harrison, 2007). Participants were recruited from businesses through the Inter-

national Telework Association and through contacts of undergraduates in communi-

cation courses at a U.S. Midwestern university. Following a demonstration of

interest, participants completed an online questionnaire (pretested) that consisted

of open-ended tasks followed by a set of closed-ended instruments.

Following participation requests, 112 questionnaires were returned, of which 100

(43% male) met the studys eligibility requirements. Forty-six percent of the parti-cipants were under the age of 45, and the majority were white (74%), college educated

(48%), married (65%), and earning above-average incomes (55% over $75,000=year).

66 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

Instrumentation

Participants responded to two open-ended scenarios involving a recent (within the

most recent 4 weeks) informal interaction they had with a coworker that made them

feel (a) more included and (b) less included in their organization. Modeled after

other message elicitation studies (MacGeorge, Feng, Butler, & Burdarz, 2004), part-

icipants were instructed to think about an interaction that made them feel more con-

nected and included with their company and to describe as much of it as they could

recall using interactants exact words. A similar set of instructions elicited an inter-

action=message that brought about feelings of exclusion.

Message coding

The inclusion messages were examined for how they functioned to help teleworkers

feel included in their organizations. Using the concept of message integration from

the work of OKeefe and Delia (1982), we developed coding schemes to assess how

the messages integrated task, relational, and identity goals and the extent to which

the organizations aims and image were integrated. If the organization merely served

as circumstantial backdrop for social relating, the inclusion message was placed in a

lower level than messages representing the organization as facilitator of the interac-

tants goals. Exclusion messages were examined for the way they functioned to frac-

ture the unity of the individual and the organization and=or to prevent theintegration of the individual with organizational goals. Table 1 describes the coding

schemes and examples for inclusion and exclusion messages.

Participants responses were read multiple times by both researchers to form the

coding systems, with each response considered as a whole and coded for its highest

level attained on the relevant system (for similar coding systems, see OKeefe & Delia,

1982). Participants who indicated they had not had interactions that made them feel

included or excluded were assigned zeros in the message-coding system, with overall

inclusion message responses ranging from 0 (6%), 1 (6%), 2 (31%), 3 (31%), and 4

(16%), while exclusion message responses ranged from 0 (17%), 1 (31%), 2 (37%),and 3 (7%). To assess intercoder reliability, a third person unconnected to the study

coded 20% of the protocols. Reliability was acceptable for inclusion and exclusionmessage codings, respectively (Ms 2.50, 1.40, SDs 1.07, 0.873, Cohen kappas.71, .73).

Collegial talk

Drawing on Holmes (2003) research, we presented teleworkers with six informal talk

activities they might engage in with coworkers: laughing, getting to know one another,

expressing similarities, collaborating and complimenting one another, and learning

about each others ideas. Participants rated their frequency of engaging in each talk

activity using 7-point scales ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 7 (Constantly=More than

15 times per week). A factor analysis (oblique rotation) produced a single factor

(eigenvalue 4.19, 69.90% variance accounted for, loadings .62.92). The itemswere averaged to form a measure of collegial talk (M 3.14, SD 1.32, a .93).

Telecommuting 67

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

Coworker social support

Participants completed a 14-item version of Albrecht and Halseys (1991) social

support measure to assess the level of social support teleworkers experienced from

their coworkers (e.g., My coworkers provide me with information and advice to

help me solve problems). The Likert items produced responses that formed one

Table 1 Coding Systems for Inclusion and Exclusion Messages

Inclusion Message Level

1. Message pursues basic relational goals grounded in normal conventions; organization is

incidental backdrop for social relating. Includes social conventions, such as simple greetings,

planning: So, once the day is done, wanna meet me at the bar for happy hour?

2. Message acknowledges individuals identity, with relational and task goals typically addressed

through providing or soliciting assistance; organizations goals only implicitly acknowledged or

seen as contextual facilitator for communication. Compliments, acknowledgments, basic

support, information often expressed: The individual asked my opinion and I responded, then

he was like how would you handle this, I told him what I would do and he thanked me for taking

the time in explaining it to him.

3. Message integrates relational, task, and=or identity goals, with the organization as the basis for

interaction. Message occurs within discrete interactions and typically involved planning and=or

compliments: We have been working closely together to plan our training sessions over the next

several weeks; During the trade show she said, Thank you for being here. Your insight is

beneficial.

4. Task, relational, and identity goals are directly and mutually pursued within a broader context,

and are structurally embedded, with explicit implications for the organizations identity.

Individual and organizational goals are embedded within each other: Conference call between

me and three other managers in the office. They requested my input and recommendations

before making a final decision and they included me in the final decision. I was asked for the

positives and negatives of our decision, and how it may impact our relationship with our

partners (agents), etc.

Exclusion Message Level

1. Task or relational goals impeded through error or careless behavior; organization is incidental

backdrop. Member not included in personal relations or provided with basic information or

help: We dont use that procedure anymore Me: No one told me.

2. Task, relational, and=or identity goals impeded; organization seen as facilitating or failing to

prevent impediments. Employee experiences exclusion through disregard, lack of support: Joe,

why did the company decide to cut incentives? I dont get it. Just when we thought everything

was going well. Sorry, not at liberty to say. Just have to ride it out, I guess.

3. Relational, task, and identity goals actively rejected; organization impermeable to identity aims.

Exclusion through explicit denial of ones legitimacy such that ones task and identity goals are

rejected: I received a call from another employee with his concerns regarding the current

climate and managements seemingly lack of concern and understanding of the field claim

representatives jobs. Management is expecting the same amount of work completed by both

groups of field employees.

68 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

factor that explained 67.46% of the variance (eigenvalue 9.45, loadings .67.92).Items were averaged to form a general measure of coworker support (M 4.38,SD 1.48, a .95).

Specific coworker-relationship quality

Adapted fromNortons (1983) relationship quality measure, participants responded to

five Likert items about the quality of the relationship with the coworker they interacted

with the most (e.g., We have a good relationship). Responses formed a single factor

(eigenvalue 3.82; 76.44% variance explained; loadings .82.90), so items wereaveraged to form a measure of specific coworker-relationship quality (M 3.97,SD 0.661, a .94).

Organizational identification

Participants completed the 12-item version of Cheneys (1983) OI scale, which

assesses employee-perceived membership and loyalty (e.g., I am very proud to be

an employee of this organization). These Likert items produced responses that

loaded onto one factor (eigenvalue 5.28, 65.94% variance explained, loadings.73.94). Items were averaged to form an OI measure (M 4.92, SD 1.05, a .93).

Organizational commitment

Participants also completed Mowday, Steers, and Porters (1979) OC scale, which

assesses an individuals involvement in and attachment to his=her work organizationand intent to stay (e.g., I would accept almost any type of job assignment in order to

keep working for this organization). The nine-item version was used (Tett & Meyer,

1993) with a 7-point Likert response format. Factor analysis led to the elimination of

three items (eigenvalue 3.55; 59.14% variance explained; loadings .71.84) thatwere averaged to form the OC measure (M 5.40, SD 1.38, a .88).

Results

We tested our hypotheses with Pearson correlations and moderated multiple regression

analyses. Table 2 presents Pearson correlations of the constructs. Our first hypothesis

was mostly supported. Inclusion message level and social support were positively

associated with OI and OC, but collegial talk was positively associated with OI and

not associated with OC. Exclusion message level was negatively associated with OI

and OC. These relationships were at weak-to-moderate levels of magnitude; the strong-

est relationship was between social support and OI (r .37).Inclusion messages, collegial talk and social support were positively intercorrelated,

with the strongest relationship between collegial talk and social support (r .52).Exclusion message level was not related to the other informal communication

constructs. Specific coworker-relationship quality was positively correlated with OI

and OC and also with collegial talk and social support.

Telecommuting 69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

The hypotheses were assessed with hierarchical multiple regression analyses

involving mean-centered predictors. Inclusion message level, collegial talk, social

support, exclusion message level, and specific coworker-relationship quality were

entered in Step one, followed by the cross-product interaction terms in Step two

representing the anticipated interaction effects. Table 3 presents the findings.

Table 2 Pearson Correlations of the Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Inclusion Message Level

2. Exclusion Message Level .14

3. Collegial Talk .27

.11

4. Social Support .26

.14 .52

5. Coworker-Relationship Quality .20# .11 .35 .56 6. OI .26 .27 .24 .37 .35 7. OC .27 .27 .16 .27 .32 .85

Note. OIOrganizational identification; OCOrganizational Commitment.#p< .10. p< .05. p< .01. p< .001.

Table 3 Regression Results on Teleworkers

Organizational Identification and Commitment

Variables OI b OC b

Step 1

Inclusion Message .25 .25

Exclusion Message .32 .30Collegial Talk .06 .01

Social Support .27 .15Coworker Relations .11 .17

Adjusted R2 .27 .20

Step 2

Inclusion Message .21 .23

Exclusion Message .29 .28Collegial Talk .06 .02

Social Support .21 .11

Coworker Relations .16 .20

Social Support Exclusion .20 .13Coworker Relations Exclusion .32 .23

Adjusted R2 .33 .23

Note. Standardized (b) regression coefficients are reported.Coworker RelationsCoworker-Relationship Quality.p< .05. p< .01.

70 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

As can be seen, inclusion message level, exclusion message level, and social support

were significant predictors of OI at Step 1, R .56, Adj R2 .27, F(5, 84) 7.564,p< .001 (bs.32, .24, & .27 and semi-partial rs.31, .24, & .21 for messageexclusion, inclusion, & social support, respectively).Message inclusion and exclusion were

predictors of OC at Step 1, R .50, Adj R2 .20, F(5, 84) 5.507, p< .001 (bs.30 &.26, and semi-partial rs.29 & .24 for message exclusion & inclusion, respectively).Collegial talk and specific coworker-relationship quality did not emerge as significant

predictors of organizational identification and commitment in Step 1 of the regressions.

Hypotheses two and three posited that specific coworker-relationship quality and

general coworker support would moderate the effect of exclusion messages on

teleworkers OI and OC. The addition of the interaction terms in Step two of the

regressions showed that H2 was supported for OI, as the interaction term of specific

coworker relationship quality and exclusion message level was significant at Step two,

R2 change .08, F change (2, 82) 5.28, p< .01. To understand this interactionfurther, we created two regression lines (not shown) with conditional values of

specific coworker relationship quality (Mean = SD; Aiken & West, 1991; Hayes,2005). Teleworkers with high-coworker-relationship quality were more identified

with their organizations regardless of the level of exclusion messages they had experi-

enced. By contrast, those with low-coworker-relationship quality who experienced

exclusion messages were less identified with their organizations.

Our analysis of the moderating role of coworker relationship quality on OC

showed that the interaction term at Step two was also significant (b .23, p< .05),even though Step two as a whole did not account for significantly more variance than

Step one, R2 change .04, F change (2, 82) 2.24, ns. Regression lines were plotted(not shown) and were similar to those presented for OI. That is, teleworkers with

high-coworker-relationship quality were more highly committed to their organiza-

tions regardless of the level of exclusion messages they had experienced, while those

with low-coworker-relationship quality who experienced exclusion messages were

less committed. H2, then, was supported.

The third hypothesis was not confirmed at the p< .05 level, as the interaction term

of general peer support and message exclusion was not statistically significant for OI

or OC. Hence, general coworker support did not significantly moderate the effects of

exclusion message level on OI or OC.

Discussion

Given that high-intensity teleworkers have particular challenges that affect their orga-

nizational functioning, we sought to examine whether informal communication

practices and peer relationships of high-intensity teleworkers are systematically

related to their level of organizational identification and commitment. To date, no

study on teleworkers has examined various types of informal communication, peer

relationship quality, OI, and OC in the same research design.

The results showed that inclusion messages, coworker social support, and collegial

talk were all positively associated with OI and, except for collegial talk, were also

Telecommuting 71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

positively correlated with OC, while exclusion messages were negatively related to both

OI and OC. Coworker-relationship quality was also positively related to OI and OC. In

addition, the quality of the relationship teleworkers had with the coworker they inter-

acted with the most moderated the association of exclusion messages to OI and OC.

Together, informal communication types accounted for 27% and 20% of the vari-

ance in OI and OC, respectively. The relationships involving inclusion messages were

consistent with Bartel et al.s (2007) findings on membership granting and teleworker

identification. That social support was associated with OI and OC was consistent with

Chiaburu and Harrisons (2008) findings. However, that our collegial talk practices

measure was correlated with OI but not OC and was not a significant predictor in

regression analyses is a puzzle. Perhaps collegial talk is less important than inclusion,

exclusion, or social support; it also may be that a function of collegial talk, building

common ground, is theoretically also a function of social support and inclusion,

whose more complex forms end up being stronger predictors of OI and OC.

Our message analyses showed that stronger levels of OI and OC occurred in

association with higher levels of message inclusion, in which teleworkers experienced

greater embeddedness in their organizations. As one teleworker explained, I felt

valued that he asked my opinion. Other teleworkers described mutual collaboration,

recognition of ideas, involvement in planning, and compliments. By contrast,

messages of exclusion reflected clear hindrances to teleworkers relational, task, or

identity goals and served to repel possible claims on organizational belonging. As

one teleworker put it, Being singled out as a culprit [sic] made me [feel] less [like a

part] of a team environment. As inclusion messages functioned to confirm, exclusion

messages functioned to deny the legitimacy of remote workers contributions.

The second objective of the study involved the moderator analyses of coworker

relationship quality. While specific coworker relationship quality moderated the rela-

tionships between exclusion message level and OI and OC, general coworker social

support did not have a similar effect. These findings suggest that having a satisfying

relationship with a specific coworker may alter the experience of exclusion messages;

such relationships may be more salient and accessible as teleworkers try to make sense

of exclusion messages. Liking for coworkers has been shown to play a similar

moderating role in the effect of complaining talk on OC (Fay & Kline, 2011). Hence,

having a trusted coworker to socially validate ones identity and membership may

play a key role in developing feelings of OI and OC.

Theoretical and Empirical Contributions

These findings extend constructivist communication theory while providing new

knowledge about the value of informal coworker communication in remote work

contexts. Our empirical contributions are significant because each type of informal

communication was assessed with an orientation to identifying its constituent

communication practices. Prior to this study, little consideration had been given to

characteristics of informal communication in remote contexts. Since our findings

incorporated coding from free response data with self-report scales, the results

72 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

triangulate forms of evidence (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000) to detect the presence of

informal communication practices. Our analyses came from teleworkers specific

inclusion=exclusion messages and their reports of specific types of communication

practices, moving telecommuting research beyond the operationalization of

communication and interaction as mere frequency or perception of general beha-

viors. The findings also illuminate the experiences of an understudied subset of

teleworkershigh-intensity workers; studying their experiences working apart from

their central offices adds to the increasing research on the effects of employees work

practices, such as commuting (Berger, 2010).

Our findings also move identification inquiry from a focus on formal and hierarch-

ical practices to a focus on informal coworker communication. Specifically, our results

show that coworker-relationship quality is an important structural element that shapes

OI independent of organizational goals. Interpersonal trust and liking in specific rela-

tionships appear to have structuring qualities that affect individual employees organi-

zational experiences, with these structuring qualities yet to be completely understood.

A final contribution of the study has to do with the message analytic coding

systems. Constructivist message analyses have typically focused on the meanings

constructed dyadically between interactants and have not incorporated the perspec-

tives of a third-party addressee or collective entity into the message analyses. Yet,

the constructivist concept of message integration has been fruitfully applied here,

thereby extending constructivist communication theory.

Limitations and Future Research

This study provides correlational, not causal, evidence for the relationship between

informal coworker communication and teleworkers OI and OC; it did not show that

informal practices cause higher levels of identification or commitment to develop,

which a longitudinal design could allow. A larger sample would also enable compar-

isons between teleworker subgroups. Finally, future research could utilize data like

these to develop closed-ended items to measure message exclusion and inclusion,

which would then permit the study of larger samples.

To cope with teleworker isolation, practitioners have suggested that teleworkers

participate more in face-to-face meetings, chat rooms, and other online arenas

(Jacobs, 2008), but the effectiveness of these recommendations has not yet been tested;

our findings suggest the merit of systematically assessing this recommendation. Our

findings further suggest that recognition of teleworkers contributions at the organiza-

tional level (e.g., publishing results achieved or ideas presented by teleworkers in a

company newsletter) may help build awareness of teleworkers sense of belonging.

The role of coworker relationships also merits further study, for whether specific cow-

orker relationships or simply the opportunity to engage in informal communication is

the catalyst for employees to feel more identified and committed remains unclear.

Finally, our findings underscore the usefulness of message analyses for future

research in work contexts. Inclusion messages could be analyzed with such dimensions

as membership claiming and granting (Bartel et al., 2007) or person-centeredness

Telecommuting 73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

(OKeefe & Delia, 1982) and could be examined in relation to other organizational

outcomes such as job satisfaction.

With data to support the importance of coworker relationships and informal com-

munication for teleworkers and their organizations, the argument for training man-

agers on how to encourage peer liking and trust, and how to develop opportunities

for the kinds of informal talk identified here, is compelling. These results point to a

need to move from casting informal talk and friendships at work as insignificant, to

committing resources to their practice and development, and for shifting existing

mindsets from a focus on formal communication and recognition programs to a more

holistic perspective that considers employees relationship and communication needs.

References

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991).Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage.

Albrecht, T. L., & Halsey, J. (1991). Supporting the staff nurse under stress. Nursing Management,

22(7), 6064.

Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An

examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325374.

Bartel, C. A., Wrzesniewski, A., & Wiesenfeld, B. (2007). The struggle to establish organizational

membership: Newcomer socialization in remote work contexts. In C. A. Bartel, S. Blader &

A. Wrzesniewski (Eds.), Identity and the modern organization (pp. 119133). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Berger, K. M. (2010). Negotiating a questionable identity: Commuter wives and social networks.

Southern Communication Journal, 75(1), 3556.

Blau, P. (2000). The structure of social associations. In J. Farganis (Ed.), Readings in social theory

(pp. 297310). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.

Brocklehurst, M. (2001). Power, identity and new technology homework: Implications for new

forms of organizing. Organization Studies, 22(3), 445466.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). The year in review. Data report. Retrieved from http://www.

volpe.dot.gov/infosrc/docs/yir08.pdf

Burleson, B. R., & MacGeorge, E. (2002). Supportive communication. In M. Knapp & J. Daly

(Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 374424). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cheney, G. (1983). On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: A field

study of organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 50, 342362.

Cheney, G., Christensen, T., & Larson, J. (2001). Organizational identity: Linkages between internal

and external communication. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of

organizational communication (pp. 231269). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and

meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 10821103.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative

research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.,

pp. 129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

DeSanctis, G., & Monge, P. (1998). Communication processes for virtual organizations. Journal of

Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4), 123.

Ellison, N. B. (2004). Telework and social change: How technology is reshaping the boundaries between

home and work. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Fay, M. J., & Kline, S. L. (2011). Coworker relationships in high-intensity telecommuting. Journal of

Applied Communication Research, 39, 144163.

74 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2006). Friendship as a moderator of the relationship between social

skills problems and peer victimization. Aggressive Behavior, 32(2), 110121.

Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about

telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 15241541.

Golden, T. D. (2006a). Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Telework and the intervening impact of

work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Vocational Behavior,

69(1), 176187.

Golden, T. D. (2006b). The role of relationships in understanding telecommuter satisfaction.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 319340.

Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The impact of professional isolation on teleworker

job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-

face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? Journal of Applied

Psychology, 93(6), 14121421.

Hall, D. T., & Schneider, B. (1972). Correlates of organizational identification as a function of

career pattern and organizational type. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 340350.

Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T. (1970). Personal factors in organizational identification.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 176190.

Hayes, A. F. (2005). Statistical methods for communication science. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

Hobfoll, S. E., Freedy, J., Lane, C., & Geller, P. (1990). Conservation of social resources: Social support

resource theory. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 465478.

Hogg, M., Terry, D., & White, K. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity

theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4), 255269.

Holmes, J. (2000). Victoria Universitys language in the workplace project: An overview. Language

in the workplace. Occasional paper 1. Retrieved from http://www.victoria.ac.nz.lals/wp/docs/

ops/opl.htm

Holmes, J. (2003). Small talk at work: Potential problems for workers with an intellectual disability.

Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(1), 6584.

Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2004). Relational practice in the workplace: Womens talk or gendered

discourse? Language in Society, 33(3), 377398.

Hylmo, A., & Buzzanell, P. M. (2002). Telecommuting as viewed through cultural lenses: An

empirical investigation of the discourses of utopia, identity, and mystery. Communication

Monographs, 69(4), 329356.

Jacobs, G. (2008). Constructing corporate commitment amongst remote employees. Corporate

Communications: An International Journal, 131(1), 4255.

MacGeorge, E. L., Feng, B., Butler, G. L., & Burdarz, S. K. (2004). Understanding advice in support-

ive interactions: Beyond the facework and message evaluation paradigm. Human Communi-

cation Research, 30(1), 4270.

Morgan, S. J., & Symon, G. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and remote management.

Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 302311.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commit-

ment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224247.

Muchinsky, P. M. (1977). Organizational communication: Relationships in organizational climate

and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 20(4), 592607.

Norton, R. (1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of

Marriage and the Family, 45(1), 141151.

OKeefe, B., & Delia, J. (1982). Impression formation and message production. In M. E. Roloff &

C. R. Berger (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 3372). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

OKeefe, B., & Delia, J. (1988). Communication tasks and communication practices: The develop-

ment of audience-centered message production. In B. A. Rafoth & D. L. Rubin (Eds.), The

social construction of written communication (pp. 7098). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Telecommuting 75

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13

OKeefe, B., Delia, J., & OKeefe, D. (1980). Interaction analysis and the analysis of interactional

organization. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 3, 2557.

OKeefe, B., & Shepherd, G. (1989). The communication of identity during face-to-face persuasive

interactions. Communication Research, 19(3), 375404.

Payne, S. C., & Huffman, A. H. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the influence of mentoring

on organizational commitment and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1),

158168.

Pearce, J. L., & Randel, A. E. (2004). Expectations of organizational mobility, workplace social

inclusion, and employee job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(1), 8198.

Pittam, J. (1999). The historical and emergent enactment of identity in language. Research on Language

and Social Interaction, 32(1&2), 111117.

Robichaud, D., Giroux, H., & Taylor, J. R. (2004). The metaconversation: The recursive property of

language as a key to organizing. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 617634.

Rock, K. W., & Pratt, M. G. (2002). Where do we go from here? Predicting identification among

dispersed employees. In B. Moingeon & G. Soenen (Eds.), Corporate and organizational

identities (pp. 5172). London, UK: Routledge.

Schutz, W. C. (1966). The interpersonal underworld. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior.

Shotter, J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2003). Managers as practical authors in everyday conversation for

action. In D. Holman & R. Thorpe (Eds.), Management and language (pp. 1537). London,

UK: Sage.

Sias, P. M., & Cahill, D. J. (1998). From co-workers to friends: The development of peer relation-

ships in the workplace. Western Journal of Communication, 62, 273299.

Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention:

Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46, 259293.

Thatcher, S. M., & Zhu, X. (2006). Changing identities in a changing workplace: Identification,

identity enactment, self-verification, and telecommuting. Academy of Management Review,

31(4), 10761088.

Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., & Garud, R. (1999). Communication patterns as determinants of

organizational identification in a virtual organization. Organization Science, 10(6), 777790.

Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., & Garud, R. (2001). Organizational identification among virtual

workers: The role of need for affiliation and perceived work-based social support. Journal of

Management, 27, 213229.

WorldatWork. (2009). Telework trendlines. Research report. Retrieved from http://www.worldatwork.

org/waw/adimLink?id=31115

Zimmerman, S., & Applegate, J. (1994). The communication of social support. In B. Burleson,

T. L. Albrecht & I. G. Sarason (Eds.), Communicating social support in organizations

(pp. 5070). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

76 The Southern Communication Journal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [G

eorg

e Mas

on U

nivers

ity] a

t 10:3

7 07 J

anua

ry 20

13