4.7 Article

Leaving Work at Work: A Meta-Analysis on Employee Recovery From Work

Journal

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT
Volume 47, Issue 4, Pages 867-897

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0149206319864153

Keywords

stress; meta-analysis; well-being; occupational health and safety

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study meta-analyzed the relationships between employee recovery, demands, resources, well-being, and performance, revealing generally positive relationships between recovery and resources, well-being, and performance as well as a negative relationship with demands. The size and consistency of observed effects differed markedly based on the conceptualization utilized, while recovery experiences and the state of being recovered showed substantial temporal consistency.
After reviewing the various ways employee recovery from work has been conceptualized in existing literature as well as the predominant theoretical frameworks used to study recovery, we meta-analyze the relationships between employee recovery, demands, resources, well-being, and performance. We also quantitatively examine the conceptualizations of recovery as activities, experiences, or states in terms of both their intercorrelations and differing effects with demands, resources, well-being, and performance. Results of meta-analyses using a total of 198 empirical samples indicated general support for the hypothesized positive relationships between employee recovery and resources, well-being, and performance as well as a negative relationship with demands. However, the size and consistency of observed effects differed markedly based on the conceptualization utilized. Additionally, various conceptualizations of recovery were shown to be only modestly related, while recovery experiences and the state of being recovered were shown to have substantial temporal consistency. Implications of these findings for scholars studying recovery and practitioners are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available