To view this page ensure that Adobe Flash Player version 11.1.0 or greater is installed.
A Broader Perspective on Telework I-O inquiry, if such a pursuit is consistently identifiable and meaningful, does not occur in a vacuum. Our field, inasmuch as it is demarcated from other organiza- tional and psychological sciences, nonetheless cele- brates a shared underlying scientific tradition and, in many cases, more-recent bridges in the evolutionary ladder—to neuroscience and learning theory and cog- nitive, developmental, and positive psychology in one direction and to human resource management (though we’ve recently drawn fire for our involvement there) in another, to name but a few. We may lament how we fail to lean on the advances made in these attached fields when conducting our own work. Steven Toaddy Louisiana Tech University 28 For example, telework in its many guises and forms has been explored fairly well in the last decade or more within our field. The topic has received attention from the perspective of worker well-being and work–life bal- ance (Golden, Veiga, & Simsek, 2006; Kossek, Lautsch, & Eaton, 2006), from the perspective of professional isola- tion (Golden, Veiga, & Dino, 2008), and from the per- spective of leadership outcomes (Gallaher & Yonce, 2009). It has been tied to changes in performance (Golden et al., 2008; Kossek et al., 2006), commitment (Golden, 2006), and turnover intentions (Golden, 2006; Golden et al., 2008; Kossek et al., 2006; Morganson & Heinen, 2011). The scientist–practitioner orientation of SIOP has been captured in efforts to explore how and when to put telework into practice based on the best available scientific evidence available (DeLay & Morgan- son, 2009). Levels of analysis including the individual (Golden, 2006; Golden et al., 2006; Kossek et al., 2006) and the work unit (Morganson & Heinen, 2011) have been pursued in research. All of these efforts are laud- able and contribute to a more robust understanding July 2014 Volume 52 Issue 1