Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39989635›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Social employee well-being challenges of academics in the hybrid work environment.

Rudo Rachel Marozva, Anna-Marie Pelser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Rudo Rachel MarozvaNorth-West University Business School, North-West University, Mahikeng, South Africa.
Anna-Marie PelserGlobal, Innovative, Forefront, Talent Management (GIFT), Mahikeng, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The complex nature of the hybrid work environment impacts on the overall well-being of employees. There is limited research on how the hybrid work environment has impacted the social dimension of employee well-being, particularly among academics in higher education institutions. The aim of the study was to explore and understand social well-being challenges that academics face as a result of the hybrid work environment. The study adopted a cross-sectional qualitative research approach and used semi-structured interviews using an interview guide to collect data. The sample included 23 academics who are representatives of the three campuses of North-West University. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Three themes emerged from the analyses of data: social connections, sense of belonging and work relationships. The social connections theme had four sub-themes: social isolation, informal communication breakdown, limited networking and personality conflict. Sense of belonging theme entailed four sub-themes: lack of resources, work-life imbalance, onboarding challenges and non-inclusive work environment. Relationships theme had three sub-themes: lack of trust, reduced social support and delayed feedback. Experiences of the research participants are noted to comprehend the negative impact of the hybrid work environment on social employee well-being. The findings suggest that social well-being challenges that academics face are heightened by the nature of the industry, personality traits and the context of the study which is Africa. This requires HEIs to explore the internal and external environment when managing social well-being challenges that academics face as a result of the hybrid work environment.

Indexed as

hybrid work environmentsense of belongingsocial connectionssocial employee well-beingwork relationships

Identifiers

PMID39989635
PMCPMC11843661

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.