Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39323587›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2024

Workforce agility: a systematic literature review and research agenda.

Devi Alviani, Hilmiana, Sunu Widianto, Wa Ode Zusnita Muizu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Devi AlvianiDepartment of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.
HilmianaDepartment of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.
Sunu WidiantoDepartment of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.
Wa Ode Zusnita MuizuDepartment of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The definition and operationalization of workforce agility, initially associated with multitasking abilities, have evolved to encompass aspects of adaptability, proactivity, and resilience, which are now widely accepted. However, some authors have expanded this concept by adding elements such as intelligence, collaboration, and social support, leading to confusion and disagreement on how to consistently measure workforce agility. Furthermore, the literature emphasizes the importance of workforce agility in achieving business goals and adopting innovative management models, yet it provides limited structured guidance for future research. Methods: This study uses Scopus and Web of Science as the primary databases. The search was not limited to a specific period but included articles up to 2024, with an initial sample of 176 articles. After a screening process based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 74 articles were included in the thematic analysis and data synthesis. Results: Workforce agility has been positioned as an independent, mediating, moderating, and dependent variable in various studies. Most studies examine workforce agility at the individual level, with only about 10 studies exploring this aspect at the organizational level. However, no research has specifically explored workforce agility at the team level to date. The primary objective of workforce agility research is to expand and connect theories with diverse methodological approaches, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. As a result, theoretical foundations and inter-variable relationships are established to identify recommendations for future research. Discussion: More than 25 fundamental theories have been identified and categorized into nine groups. These nine groups were then reformulated into four general theories: Organizational and Management Theory, Communication and Social Interaction Theory, Behavioral and Learning Theory, and Economic Theory. Based on previous research, several recommendations for future research have been outlined, including conducting longitudinal studies, integrating mixed methods, considering the global cultural context, expanding research samples, developing conceptual models, exploring mediating and moderating variables, developing workforce agility theories, creating efficient evaluation methods, and implementing multilevel models.

Indexed as

adaptivityagile workforceproactiveresilienceworkforce agility

Identifiers

PMID39323587
PMCPMC11422224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.