Published at : 19 Oct 2022
Volume : IJtech
Vol 13, No 5 (2022)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v13i5.5830
Sharmila Rani Moganadas | Faculty of Business, Multimedia University, Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, 75450 Bukit Beruang, Melaka, Malaysia |
Gerald Guan Gan Goh | Faculty of Business, Multimedia University, Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, 75450 Bukit Beruang, Melaka, Malaysia |
The concept of digital
employee experience (DEX) has attracted a great deal of interest from both
academics and practitioners. Past literature shows that DEX has the potential
to improve employee engagement, motivation, productivity, learning, and
behavior. Yet, the discussion on the disposition of the constructs of DEX that
influence organizational outcomes and measurement mechanism remains meager and
heterogeneous. This article offers a detailed and focused review of the literature
on DEX. Regarding the methodology, a comprehensive literature review method was
used. Under a documentary design, the research techniques involved content
analysis of academic publications and professional reports. As a result, the
construction of DEX constructs and measurement framework stands out. The
authors concluded that DEX has positive implications for the establishment of
the total employee experience (EX) management in workplaces.
Digital culture; Digital employee experience; Digital workplace; Individual differences
The resource-based theory (RBT) is a popular
management framework that focuses on internal organizational resources to
understand the accomplishment or failure of leveraging corporate activities (Kozlenkova et al., 2014). According to Barney and Clark (2007), RBT aims to explain the
imperfectly imitable firm resources that could potentially become the source of
sustained competitive advantage. These strategic resources are valuable, rare,
difficult to imitate, and non-substitutable, that set off the foundation for
developing firm capabilities to pursue long-term success. Among the strategic
resources that can contribute to superior strong performance over time is human
capital, which has gained recognition as a universally valuable and imperfectly
imitable resource (Grant, 2003; Crook et al., 2011).
Human capital resources encompass experience, intelligence, training, judgment,
relationships, and insights from employees, such as managers and workers in a
company (Utami & Alamanos, 2021).
Mollick (2012) findings indicated that variation among individuals matters far more in organizational performance than is generally assumed (Foss, 2005; Foss, 2011). Nevertheless, studies exploring the individual differences in explaining the variance in performance among firms are scant (Mollick, 2012). Because of this, some scholars emphasized the importance of applying the micro-foundations approach to examine individual actions and interactions. Micro-foundations research focuses on understanding the underlying idiosyncratic nature, choices, preferences, abilities, propensities, heterogeneity, expectations, motivations, and mental models of individual employees and their interactions with one another (Felin & Foss, 2005; Foss, 2011). Felin and Foss (2005) affirmed that such understanding is fundamental and should lead the way to explicating any strategic topic at the organizational level (e.g., knowledge, identity, and learning).
This said,
much of the recent literature in the sphere of human capital coincides with
that of interest in employee experience (termed as EX hereafter) (Plaskoff, 2017; Morgan, 2018; The Josh Bersin Company,
2021). Morgan (2017) analysis of over
250 global organizations found that companies that scored highest on EX
benchmarks have four times higher average profits, two times higher average
revenues, and 40 percent lower turnover compared to those that did not. At its
core, EX is a company-wide initiative to help employees stay productive,
healthy, engaged, and on track through easy-to-use platform of tools. These
tools, however necessitate long-term redesign of and commitment from the organization (Morgan, 2017), and a cross-sectional strategy
embraced by the C-suite (The Josh Bersin Company,
2021).
Morgan (2015) attested that an organization, which
focuses on EX should be creating a place where people want to show up instead
of assuming that people need to show up. The EX-equation formula developed by Morgan (2016a) comprises culture + technology +
physical space = EX. The cultural
environment refers to the “feeling” component, which includes the vibes an
employee gets and the mood and tone that the workplace sets, such as leadership
style and organizational structure. The physical environment is the one that
employees can see, touch, taste, and smell, for example, the office and
cafeteria. The technological environment refers to the tools employees use to
get their jobs done, including devices, applications, software, user
experience, design, and digital transformation (Morgan,
2015). The definition of EX varies across diverse literature (Ludike, 2018; Plaskoff, 2017; Raia, 2017), but a
commonality exists in describing it as a big picture: holistic end-to-end
employee journeys and their interactions with everything and everyone within an
organization.
Drawing on
ideas from EX, scholars developed the construct of digital employee experience
(termed as DEX hereafter); a subset component of EX that precisely captures
employees’ user experiences of their interactions with company technology,
which dictates their daily work experience (Firstup,
2021). Indeed, the exploration of DEX has become even more crucial,
ensuing the staggering changes in the workplace landscape triggered by the
COVID-19 pandemic. People across the world encountered sudden job disruptions
due to lockdowns and self-isolation, which disconnected them from their
workspaces and colleagues. Numerous employers migrated to digital technology as
their contingency plan to continue operating via teleworking and tools such as
video conferencing, cloud services, and virtual private networks. Organizations
with pre-existing teleworking and hybrid work model capabilities could adapt
rapidly and maintain production levels because they have the necessary
equipment to make a relatively seamless shift to working from home (OECD, 2021).
On the
other hand, organizations that lack resources, experience, and digital fluency
were not prepared to entirely switch to online working mode and expected
employees to learn to cope with changes and job demands simultaneously and
rapidly within a short time frame. For example, having to learn to use online
materials in the shortest possible time with little training and preparation,
set up “home office” with limited infrastructure and Internet facilities, etc. (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2020; Dingel &
Neiman, 2020; OECD, 2021). Apart from being exacerbated by the “fresh
start effect” that affected employees to make significant changes during the
pandemic, the ongoing operational and administrative tasks have left the
employees feeling exhausted and frustrated. The situation worsened when their
corporate networks and systems contain static content and lack helpful
resources (Wilson, 2022).
The Josh Bersin Company (2021) interpreted the
situation as “we’re not working from home but living at work,” leaving
employees with feelings of burnout, mental health decline, and deteriorated
work-life balance (Wilson, 2022).
Inopportunely, these factors have somewhat contributed to the impetus of the
Great Resignation phenomenon that has taken a significant toll across
industries worldwide in the current post-pandemic era, which urges employers to
invest more time, effort, and cost on DEX to retain their employees (Srinivasan, 2022; Wilson,
2022). According to Zucker et al. (2020),
when organizations adopt technology that results in an enabling, empowering,
and frictionless experience, they are one-step closer to an overall positive
workforce experience.
Nevertheless,
the study by Crawford et al. (2020) demonstrated
that academic staff, who had to undergo sudden transition from physical
operations to teleworking, experienced mental stress, anxiety, vision syndrome,
and depression. Meanwhile, a study within the hospitality industry in mainland
China revealed home boredom during COVID-19 isolation had driven employees
toward online leisure crafting, which resulted in employees’ thriving and
career self-management (Chen, 2020). Given these disparities, Kilgour et al. (2019) put forward that adapting to
digital technologies can be frightening for some, especially for those who are
more conversant with the traditional approach, while others may have been
progressing their technological skills and competencies in an instant to be
able to deliver digitally. Hence, DEX may impose a different degree of
implications on other individuals. Such circumstance calls organizations to
rethink DEX and improve it by constantly assessing DEX among employees (Gheidar & ShamiZanjani, 2021) since digital
workspace and hybrid work model are evolving as a way forward for most
organizations, even after post pandemic. To do so, more profound understanding
of the constructs that make up DEX and how it can be measured is vital. Yet,
studies that explore DEX remain sparse.
This article, therefore, aims to (i) describe and conceptualize
DEX, and (ii) identify and consolidate the critical constructs into a
conceptual framework that can guide in measuring DEX. We do so by carrying out
a literature review in the field of DEX research. The preceding literature
highlights DEX as one of the big contributors to overall EX within an
organization. As such, discounting the understanding of how different employees
feel about interacting with their firm’s technologies may inflict risks of
wasting resources and maintaining the shortcomings that may deteriorate
employee productivity and satisfaction. Furthermore, this study fills in the
significant lacuna in the existing DEX scholarship and sets forth agenda for
future research works. It is structured as follows: the methods section
discusses the procedures that founded the literature review. The results and
discussion section presents the insights derived and combines relevant
constructs that have been captured into a guiding framework, interprets the
significant findings and explains any new discoveries that emerged from the
review. The conclusions section presents the conclusive ideas in line with
the objectives and the implications for future research.
We adapted the research methodology
flowchart by Driouach et
al. (2019) in this review (see Appendix
1). Next, we conducted a comprehensive desktop search, focusing on DEX. Scopus and Google Scholar
databases were used to identify “DEX” or “digital
employee experience” in their title, abstract, and keywords. The
search generated 17 articles between 2016 and 2022. Due to the limited number of studies in the
area of DEX, the authors relied on grey literature (Paez,
2017) and snowballing technique (Wohlin et
al., 2022) to identify studies discussing a similar topic, such as digital transformation, digital workplace, and employee
experience. Hence, we included journal articles, conference proceedings, books,
book chapters, professional reports, essays from blogs, and white papers in this
research. Scant DEX research signifies that it is at an inchoate stage (Kraus et al., 2020). Thus, the authors opted for
a qualitative approach to summarize, synthesize and identify gaps in the
existing literature to position research endeavors and support practices around
DEX (Petticrew & Roberts, 2008). In
pursuit of this, we employed a content analysis to present the findings in
categories (Bengtsson, 2016). Subsequently,
we interpreted and consolidated the findings into a guiding framework.
3.1. Defining DEX as a Subset of EX
According to Morgan (2015, 2016a),
the technological environment is the central nervous system of an organization.
In support of this claim, the research of The Josh
Bersin Company (2021) affirmed that organizations should carefully
design the technology and services component to make an excellent EX
sustainable and scalable. Technology underpins and supports the other six
pillars of an irresistible organization – meaningful work, strong management, a
positive workplace, health and wellbeing, growth opportunity, and trust in the organization.
We present the specific definitions of DEX provided by the reviewed
publications in Table 1.
Table 1 Definitions of DEX
Definition of DEX |
Source |
DEX is the total of the digital
interactions within the work environment. |
Robertson (2018) |
DEX is focused on combining platforms,
tools, and processes to create compelling, consumer-grade personalized
experiences that increase productivity, creativity, and foster collaboration
with a digital mindset. |
Zucker et al.
(2020) |
DEX results from a holistic
employee’s perceptions in the digital workplace. DEX, therefore, results from
the sum of employee’s direct and indirect interactions with their career,
other employees, managers, customers, strategy, systems, culture, brand, and
organization competitors that are influenced by their individual
characteristics. |
Gheidar and
ShamiZanjani (2020) |
DEX is the sum of digital interactions
between employees and their organization. |
ThoughtFarmer
Intranet Blog (2022) |
DEX is a reflection of how
effectively people interact with their workplace digital tools, which allows
them to be engaged, proficient, and productive. |
Boatman (2021) |
Robertson (2018) further postulated two primary
lenses of DEX: time or career progression, and space, particularly, digital
workspace. Time or career progression encompasses the recruitment, onboarding,
and departure phases of an employee’s career. Whereas the digital workspace
comprises devices and systems, capabilities, activities, insights, and
experiences. Gheidar and ShamiZanjani (2020)
proposed eight components for DEX: career, individual characteristics, business
strategy, technology, culture, physical environment, brand, and leadership. Daud et al. (2021) identified seven factors
influencing DEX. These include flexible organizational structure, big data,
enterprise platforms, digital infrastructure, learning, training, and digital
literacy skills.
Abhari et al. (2021) emphasized on the importance of articulating the critical attributes of
a digital culture that shape EX and employee engagement in digital governance
for an effective digital transformation. The author defined EX as how employees
perceive the experiential benefits of digitalization (i.e. positive experience
gained through the use of firm’s technologies). According to the ThoughtFarmer Intranet Blog (2022), DEX
encompasses how employees work, what tools and technology they use, and the
culture they exist within. Hence, organizations are responsible for examining
the infrastructure (tools they have and whether they are necessary); employee
interaction (people whom employees interact with and the processes they rely on
to complete their jobs); and experiences (whether the technology the employees
use is difficult and complex or intuitive and productive). Boatman (2021) addressed DEX, more specifically,
as interfacing with technologies for workflow and productivity, communication
and collaboration, learning, and HR systems with relevant examples.
The study by Sudrajat et
al. (2021) demonstrated the moderating role of DEX between employee
service orientation and ambidexterity that influences employee agility among
dry port firms’ employees. A similar finding by Syahchari
et al. (2021) among Cikarang dry port employees in Indonesia showed that
DEX significantly affects the firm effectiveness. In both studies, DEX was
measured using different indicators and concepts, which signifies inconsistency
and lack of one single framework for DEX. A similar concern was also raised in Gheidar and ShamiZanjani (2021). Among the reviewed articles, only one
academic research by Gheidar and ShamiZanjani
(2021) presented a holistic DEX framework comprising seven significant
components and seventy sub-components, using systematic literature review
(termed as SLR hereafter) and experts’ interview methods. These major
components include the physical environment, business strategy, leadership,
technology, career, brand, personal, and culture. Even though the authors
attempted to describe the sub-components in the context of DEX to some extent,
we found that some sub-components lack linkage with DEX. For example, the
sub-component, “The organization should have a long-term strategy (10-20
years),” lacks a description of how the authors incorporate the element of DEX
to the long-term strategy.
While the past literature conveyed the components of DEX differently,
they all have in joint discussion on DEX to some degree, in the context of experiences
that employees encounter (or EX) when interacting with digital tools in their
workplaces. Drawing from these insights, we conceptualize DEX as to how
employees perceive and feel about their interactions with digital technologies
that their organization designs, based on the purpose/need, credibility, ease
of use, and organizational support that have immense effects on overall EX, employees’
engagement, retention, learning, proficiency, and productivity.
3.2. Constructs of DEX
A
consensus exists among the reviewed articles in highlighting the digital
technologies and environment, digital culture and work practices, and
individual characteristics and demographics as precursors of DEX. It remains
ironic, though, despite the fact that DEX is becoming a progressively integral
part of overall EX, magnified by the expansion of hybrid working models and
teleworking, past literature across the academic and professional milieus lacks
a comprehensive DEX model or framework, which could serve as a reference point
for its implementation. In light of this, in the following section, we examine
the classifications of constructs and potential measurement mechanism for DEX
in detail from the past literature.
3.2.1. Digital
Technologies and Environment
The
deployment of digital workplaces and smart offices is gaining momentum across
firms due to its capacity to reshape and decentralize the traditional office
setting. Yet, Attaran et al. (2019) highlighted
that there is widespread confusion about its implementation. The Dell and Intel
Future Work Study Global report in 2016 revealed that more than 30 percent of
employees mentioned that their significant time-wasters at their jobs were
tech-related, which include slow, malfunction software or devices (Attaran et al., 2019). Another study by Haskins
and Nilssen, as cited in Attaran et al. (2019),
showed that the vast majority of organizations have little or no teleconferencing
and collaboration technologies in place for their meeting rooms, and highlighted
technical difficulty as one of the main reasons for prolonged meetings. Such
situations show that creating digital workplaces constitutes more than merely
merging technology into business operations and activities. Effective
implementation of digital technologies and environment requires feedback and
opinions from the employees as they use the technologies daily.
Likewise,
Abhari et al. (2021) claimed that organizations
that introduce new technology without direct input from end-users impose
restrictive digital governance that can negatively affect the satisfaction and
motivation of their employees. As such, a well-thought-out formation and
implementation of digital technologies in workplaces should entail the
participation of digital mindset employees who can explore, connect, socialize,
and in turn, sculpt unique consumer experiences (Ludike,
2018). Additionally, Attaran et al. (2019) and
Morgan (2018) averred that, to reap the most
benefits from digital workplace solutions, organizations should provide
employees with a consistent, consumer like user experience through consumer-grade
technology that is modern, forward thinking, engaging, and entirely aligned
with the way people work today.
Digital
technologies and environment across firms are becoming increasingly essential
and encompass a wide variety of elements (Berawi et
al., 2020). Morgan (2016b) conveyed
the need for organizations to adopt cloud-based technology to enable employees
to work anytime, anywhere, and on any device. However, several scholars raised
caveats against security and called organizations to make digital identity and safety
a top priority due to the growing number and variety of devices that may lead
to potential vulnerabilities (Morgan, 2016b; Attaran
et al., 2019). Creating a positive user experience by deploying
technology apps, systems, and devices that employees genuinely want to use
seems pivotal for DEX (Morgan, 2016b; Raia, 2017; Boatman, 2021).
According to Raia
(2017), organizations should align their intranet, customer relationship
management (CRM), and other tools according to their employees’ expectations by
updating their digital systems with best practices gleaned from top-tech
corporations, such as Amazon. Doing so makes processes more intuitive, allowing
employees to complete tasks quickly and move forward with fewer roadblocks. Attaran et al. (2019) stated that digital
technologies, such as enterprise collaboration, should be built on a consistent
and flexible infrastructure that multiple devices and channels can securely
access to facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration.
Zel and Kongar (2020) highlighted the importance of applying
artificial intelligence (termed as AI hereafter) tools to enhance EX. These
include virtual HR assistants/chatbots, virtual coach bots for managers, personalized
AI-based career development tools, engagement and collaboration AI tools,
mental health chatbots, and AI-powered onboarding tools. However, the
applications of AI and machine learning raise essential issues around trust and
ethics that companies should pay great attention to (The
Josh Bersin Company, 2021). These technologies will undoubtedly have an
impact on DEX if they do too much or do things unexpectedly or wrong (Wilson, 2022). Similarly, the adoption of big
data allows organizations to acquire profuse data from more connected devices (Morgan, 2016b; Daud
et al., 2021). However, inadequate planning and infrastructure of how
employees are going to analyze and make sense of it may thwart its purpose,
which in turn frustrate employees. Deloitte and Accenture offer a noteworthy
example, wherein they focus on hotline support systems to help their employees
who travel frequently for business trips access concierge service to remove
roadblocks to getting to their clients on time (The
Josh Bersin Company, 2021).
In terms of
creating a digital work environment, organizations should stand up to specific
criteria, such as quality, ease of intuitive accessibility, ease of
portability, the ability to operate consistently across the organization, and
the ability to enable working beyond corporate borders, as cited by Miller in Attaran et al. (2019). Equally, organizations
should pay attention to developing a distributed workspace, which encompasses
physical, virtual, social, and mental spaces. Physical space refers to the principal
workplace, such as the office or home. Virtual space is an electronic working
environment like instant messaging, email, and video conferencing. Social space refers to the whole social
network of team members, managers, and customers; and the mental space is the
thoughts, beliefs, ideas and mental states that employee share through
communication and collaboration (Robertson 2018; Attaran et
al., 2019).
3.2.2. Digital
Culture and Work Practices
Previous
research indicates that culture and work practices that effectively support digitalization
are key determinants of organizational success (Bencsik,
2020). However, several scholars demonstrated that the digital culture
and work practices of an organization should focus on enhancing better
experience among employees. The qualitative study by Prajapati
and Pandey (2020) demonstrated how the investment-banking sector in
India proactively leveraged new technologies to embrace transition and
disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and simultaneously created and
enriched EX at various touchpoints of employee life cycle. The study identified
five major themes that emerged as the crucial practices used by the selected
investment banks to address EX gaps. These include recruitment and onboarding,
work-from-home (termed as WFH hereafter), employee wellbeing, employee
communication, and diversity and inclusion. Some notable practices include
virtual interviews, provision of laptops, virtual ergonomics sessions for WFH,
online yoga, and regular mailers from leaders (Prajapati
& Pandey, 2020).
Furthermore,
the business strategy and concept design should embed digital features
consisting of a personal, team, and organizational tasks and performances that
blend with each other based on tasks and situations (Attaran
et al., 2019). Examples of preceding digital features may include
personal dashboards, communities of practice, social networking, enterprise
jams, communities of interest, prediction markets, etc. They serve as a
depository that enables concurrent monitoring of the progress of all projects
and activities. Abhari et al. (2021)
clarified that “digital culture is a trait of organizational culture that is
shaped while employees use digital tools or participate in digitally enabled or
facilitated business processes.” Hence, it is about digital mind-set and
digital habits shaped in an agile, dynamic, collaborative, and creative work
environment.”
Adopting
the five major cultural dimensions from Hofstede: collectivism, power distance,
uncertainty tolerance, long-term orientation, and indulgence, the authors
proposed a digital culture that coalesces to affect overall EX, which
subsequently influences employee’s intention to participate in digital
governance. For example, digital initiatives that accentuate autonomy and
willingness to learn (indulgence dimension) will, in turn, improve employee’s
cognitive experience, whereas initiatives that encourage collaboration and
communication (collectivism dimension) will result in meaningful interaction
and exchange among employees (Abhari et al., 2021).
Organizations
should also focus on advanced learning and training tools that are organized
around great learner experience (Robertson, 2018;
Daud et al., 2021; The Josh Bersin Company, 2021; Boatman, 2021). For
instance, companies like AstraZeneca, Visa, and Walmart create a
learner-centered learning ecosystem that provides highly personalized
recommendations and insights on learning according to different learning needs
at the right time, with the right content, and in the suitable format for them (The Josh Bersin Company, 2021). Employees may
learn through official training, professional development, mobile apps, virtual
reality, web conferencing etc. (Attaran et al.,
2019; Boatman, 2021).
3.2.3. Individual
Characteristics and Demographics
Several
scholars conveyed the need for organizations to examine their employees’
demographic factors and individual characteristics when they aim to improve DEX
(Ludike, 2018; Meret et al., 2018; Attaran et al., 2019; Gheidar & ShamiZanjani, 2020;
Gheidar and ShamiZanjani, 2021).
Generational differences, in particular, was highlighted as an important
criterion. For example, ThoughtFarmer Intranet Blog
(2022) illustrated that younger generations, generally have lesser
patience compared to older generations in dealing with technological glitches
at work, such as waiting for a dial-up modem to connect. In this regard, Wilson (2022) expressed a specific statement.
According to the author,
“Generation
X has worked with and witnessed an incredible technological evolution from MS
Office 1.0 to today’s apps such as Slack and Zoom, Generation Y and Z grew up
with more advanced technology and are less patient with outdated User
Experience (UX), speed, and functionality.”
Notably,
the findings of Meret et al. (2018) revealed
that generation Zers tend to give less importance to the time and space
flexibility factors of intelligent working, regardless of their gender and
country of origin. In terms of digital behavior, the use of technology and the
typology of technological devices characterize the DEX of generation Z, such as
technical attributes that allow a very high level of interconnectivity and fulfill
“social” digital behavior. Gheidar and ShamiZanjani
(2021) proposed seven features of individual component of DEX framework,
which include gender, age (relate to which generation), work experience,
previous experiences, personal habits and moods, unique vision, culture and
values, and education, skills, and prior training.
Interestingly,
all of the sub-components mentioned above in Gheidar
and ShamiZanjani (2021) were contributed by the experts’ (HR and digital
information experts) interview method undertaken by the authors, but none came
from the SLR method that they used. This indicates scant academic research
investigating the personal factors of employees in DEX. Furthermore, Sudrajat et al. (2021) examined DEX as the
moderating factor between employee’s service orientation and employee agility,
and between the relationship of employee agility and employee ambidexterity.
Employee agility comprises individual abilities such as, intelligence,
competency, collaboration, resiliency, and culture. Employee ambidexterity
refers to the motivation of employees to continually explore new knowledge and
competencies for themselves as well as trying to exploit the knowledge or
skills they already have.
3.3. Measurement and Outcomes of DEX
To
date, there is little research exploring indicators to measure the
implementation of DEX organization-wide. Considering this, our review
identifies and presents several measurement criteria that represent DEX. If the
measures do not directly epitomize DEX, we believe including items that address
EX and digitalization elements separately, but with the motive to converge them
as one model. The industry and academic counterparts have proposed or employed these
indicators. For instance, companies such as Unilever, Deutsche Telekom, and
AstraZeneca use design-thinking approaches to understand what employees need
and how they want to access information and bring these services to them in the
flow of their work (The Josh Bersin Company, 2021).
The report proposed a four-step design thinking assessment: understand the real
problem; simplify and digitize the status quo; probe, fail fast, and learn; and
scale and integrate. Some scholars stressed augmenting the design thinking
approach with “visualizing” or “reifying” intangible concepts of employees
about specific events, objects, relationships, or functions through employees’
personas and journey mappings (Plaskoff, 2017; The
Josh Bersin Company, 2021). In doing so, organizations can group
employees by similar work types and design appropriate infrastructure according
to their needs.
Sudrajat et al. (2021) measured DEX among dry port firms’
employees in Indonesia using five indicators: collaboration, technology
enabler, mobility, infrastructure, and culture and work practices. These
concepts were derived from the studies by Halid et al. as cited in Sudrajat et al. (2021) and (Attaran et al., 2019) and the authors measured using a
five-point Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.
Conversely, Syahchari et al. (2021) adopted
the six main elements - virtual HR assistants/chatbots, virtual coach bots for
managers, personalised AI-based career development tools, engagement and
collaboration AI tools, mental health chatbots, and AI-powered onboarding
tools. The authors adopted the elements from Zel
and Kongar (2020) to measure DEX among employees in Cikarang port in
Indonesia. However, sample measurement items or statements were not included in
the studies to offer a better understanding of how the authors use the measures
to gauge DEX and what were the outcomes.
Recent
work by Abhari et al. (2021), examining
whether EX can be gauged through experiential values as suggested by Dewey’s
experience theory, in the context of digitalization, provides support for conceptualizing
DEX as a psychological state. The proposed measurement of the study focuses on
the relationship between a digital culture (adapted from Hosftede’s cultural
dimensions) and EX (adapted from Dewey’s experience theory). The authors
operationalized EX in terms of cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral
experiences (as observed by Dewey) that employees develop when interacting with
their organization’s digital technologies and initiatives. Thus, based on the
analysis of the study by Abhari et al. (2021),
we depict some examples of the measurement items in Table 2 to provide a
clearer picture of how to gauge specific cultural dimension in the context of digitalization
and how it may affect a particular EX dimension.
Alternatively, Morgan (2018) proposed to create an ACE technological environment by encouraging organizations to measure their digital technologies, tools, and initiatives in the context of availability to everyone, consumer-grade technology, and employee need versus business requirements. The “availability to everyone” component focuses on assessing commitment to innovation, collaboration, and communication across the organization, enabling the organization and technological adeptness. “Consumer-grade technology” measures forward-thinking approach towards technology adoption, modern work experience, and allowing the employees to be most effective and engaged in their jobs. Lastly, “employee needs versus business requirements” refers to an organization’s commitment to allowing employees to do their best work and listening to the voice of the employees.
Table 2 Examples of items to measure the relationship between digital culture and EX
Description of organization’s
digital initiatives |
Cultural dimension being
measured |
Impact on EX dimension |
Digital technologies that
accentuate collaboration and communication through participation across
organization, and interactions that facilitate familiarity, transparency, and
networking among employees. |
Collectivism |
Social experience: Employees can expand their
network, have pleasant interactions, strengthen affiliation, have a sense of
belongingness |
Source: Adapted
from Abhari et al. (2021)
Aiming
to enhance employees’ work efficiency and positive feeling about their work
environment, Raia (2017) suggested organizations
to use best practices of user interface (UI) and user experience (UX) from the
top tech companies. By consulting the UI and UX professionals, the author
explained how organizations can improve DEX by observing and evaluating how
their systems work, then incorporate UX best principles into the design to
boost productivity, happiness, and output. For example, analyzing Amazon’s
user-friendly design will help organizations to understand the digital
experience from the user viewpoint and apply the key practices into their
corporate processes and digital workflow. Therefore, UX elements, which
comprises the following, should be given great importance in the context of
DEX: usability (is the system easy to use?); adoptability (is it easy for new
users to learn the system?); desirability (do users like the system?); and
value (is the system inherently valuable (Raia,
2017). Additionally, the author encouraged to conduct a formal usability
test to provide the organizations with qualitative and quantitative data on
system’s usability and UX. The test assesses page layout, design/visual appeal,
credibility and quality of content, accuracy of forms, navigation, information
architecture, and task orientation. The collation and analyses of such data can
show organizations where problems occur or pinpoint why something is confusing
to most users, thus allow working on improvements to make the system more
straightforward, and more enjoyable, intuitive, and valuable for employees.
Our
review revealed that digital technologies and environment, digital culture and
work practices as well as individual characteristics and demographics of
employees emerge as the primary constructs that make up DEX and its measurement
composition within an organization. Nonetheless, we identified a significant
gap and contradiction with regard to the measurement and outcomes of DEX, which
presumes further deliberation in future studies. Thereafter,
we consolidated the relevant concepts into a guiding framework for future works
as depicted in Figure 1.
Figure 1 DEX
constructs and measurement framework
Technology
plays a salient role in creating a great EX within workplaces, particularly in
contributing to better DEX through an evolutionary shift in how employees use
and view technology. Having the right, efficient and effective technologies in
place make daily tasks and moments for employees simple, yet meaningful. Using
a comprehensive review method, this paper builds on the existing literature,
assembling DEX constructs, which include digital technologies and
environment, digital culture and work practices, and individual
characteristics and demographics. The authors have identified these
constructs as the fundamentals that underpin the impending measurement
mechanism of DEX. Nevertheless, gaps occur in measuring DEX and defining its
outcomes, which require prompt and close attention from scholars and
practitioners. Drawing from the evidence from the review, we argue that a focus
on converging perspectives from academia and industry is a promising way
forward for DEX. The authors presented
the insights generated by this review in two different aspects. These include
(1) describing and conceptualizing DEX and (ii) identifying and consolidating
the critical constructs into a guiding framework that can guide in measuring
DEX. Besides representing the conceptual grounding for DEX literature, the
findings also serve as a reference point for researchers and practitioners who
aspire to implement and examine DEX further. The publications reviewed in this
study come from diverse fields and approaches, yet, despite their divergences,
they contribute to the integration of a DEX conceptual model to drive
organizational success. The authors performed the collation, comparison, and
amalgamation of relevant indicators into several themes meticulously. Given
hybrid working models and Great Resignation are becoming major trendsetters in
workplaces, we hope the study can support resetting the approach to the future
work, concentrated on DEX and its contribution to EX.
Filename | Description |
---|---|
R1-IE-5830-20220826112705.docx | --- |
Abhari, K., Ostroff, C., Barcellos, B., Williams, D., 2021.
Co-Governance in Digital Transformation Initiatives: The Roles of Digital
Culture and Employee Experience. In: Proceedings of the 54th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
Attaran, M., Attaran, S., Kirkland, D., 2019. The Need for Digital
Workplace: Increasing Workforce Productivity in the Information Age. International
Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), Volume 15(1),
pp. 1–23
Australian Bureau of
Statistics, 2020. Household Impacts of COVID-19 Survey, 29 April - 4 May.
Available Online at https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/people-and-communities/household-impacts-covid-19-survey/29-apr-4-may-2020,
Accessed on March 22, 2022
Barney, J.B., Clark, D.N., 2007. Resource-based Theory: Creating
and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. New York: OUP Oxford University Press
Bencsik, A., 2020. Challenges of Management in the Digital
Economy. International Journal of Technology, Volume 11(6),
pp. 1275–1285
Bengtsson, M., 2016. How to Plan and Perform a Qualitative Study
Using Content Analysis. NursingPlus open, Volume 2, pp. 8–14
Berawi, M.A., Suwartha, N., Asvial, M., Harwahyu, R., Suryanegara,
M., Setiawan, E.A., Surjandari, I., Zagloel, T.Y.M., Maknun, I.J., 2020.
Digital Innovation: Creating Competitive Advantages. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 11(6), pp. 1076–1080
Boatman, A., 2021. Digital Employee Experience Explained: A
Definitive Guide for HR. Academy to
Innovative HR (AIHR). Available Online at https://www.aihr.com/blog/digital-employee-experience/,
Accessed on March 30, 2022
Chen, I.S., 2020. Turning Home Boredom During the Outbreak of
COVID-19 into Thriving at Home and Career Self-Management: The Role of Online
Leisure Crafting. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Volume 32(11),
pp. 3645–3663
Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B.,
Glowatz, M., Burton, R., Magni, P., Lam, S., 2020. COVID-19: 20 Countries’
Higher Education Intra-Period Digital Pedagogy Responses. Journal of
Applied Learning & Teaching, Volume 3(1), pp. 1–20
Crook, T.R., Todd, S.Y., Combs, J.G., Woehr, D.J., Ketchen Jr,
D.J., 2011. Does Human Capital Matter? A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship
Between Human Capital and Firm Performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, Volume 96(3), p. 443
Daud, S.R., Mukapit, M., Hussin, N., Yahya,
W.K., Rahim, N.A., 2021. Digital Employee Experience (DEX). Insight Journal. Volume
8(3), pp. 151–168
Dingel, J., Neiman, B., 2020. How Many Jobs Can
Be Done at Home? Available Online at: https://github.com/jdingel/DingelNeiman-workathome/blob/master/DingelNeiman
-workathome.pdf, Accessed on April 10, 2022
Driouach, L., Zarbane, K., Beidouri, Z., 2019. Literature Review of
Lean Manufacturing in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 10(5), pp. 930–941
Felin, T., Foss, N.J., 2005. Strategic Organization: A Field in
Search of Micro-Foundations. Strategic Organization, Volume
3(4), pp. 441–455
Firstup, 2021, April 28. Digital Employee
Experience Explained. Firstup Blog.
Available Online at:https://firstup.io/blog/digital-employee-experience-explained/,
Accessed on March 30, 2022
Foss, N.J., 2011. Invited Editorial: Why Micro-Foundations for Resource-Based
Theory Are Needed and What They May Look Like. Journal of Management, Volume
37(5), pp. 1413–1428
Gheidar, Y., ShamiZanjani, M., 2020. Conceptualizing the Digital
Employee Experience. Strategic HR Review, Volume 19(3), pp. 131–135
Gheidar, Y., ShamiZanjani,
2021.
Designing a Conceptual Framework for Digital Employee Experience. Iranian
Journal of Management Studies, Volume 14(4), pp. 669–680
Grant, R.M., 2003. The Knowledge?Based View of The Firm. The
Oxford Handbook of Strategy, Volume 1, pp. 197–221
Kilgour, P., Reynaud, D., Northcote, M., McLoughlin, C., Gosselin,
K.P., 2019. Threshold Concepts About Online Pedagogy for Novice Online Teachers
in Higher Education. Higher Education Research & Development, Volume
38(7), pp. 1417–1431
Kozlenkova, I.V., Samaha, S.A., Palmatier,
R.W., 2014. Resource-Based
Theory in Marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Volume
42(1), pp. 1–21
Kraus, S., Breier, M., Dasí-Rodríguez, S., 2020. The Art of
Crafting a Systematic Literature Review in Entrepreneurship Research. International
Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Volume 16(3), pp. 1023–1042
Ludike, J., 2018. Digital Employee Experience Engagement
Paradox: Futureproofing Retention Practice. In: Coetzee, M.,
Potgieter, I., Ferreira, N. (eds). Psychology of retention, Volume 2018,
pp. 55–73
Meret, C.,
Fioravanti, S., Iannotta, M., Gatti, M., 2018. The digital employee experience: Discovering
generation Z. Digital technology and organizational change, Volume
23, pp. 241–256
Mollick, E., 2012. People and Process, Suits and Innovators: The
Role of Individuals in Firm Performance. Strategic Management Journal, Volume
33(9), pp.1001–1015
Morgan, J., 2015. The Three Environments That Create Every Employee
Experience. Forbes. Available Online at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/12/15/the-three-environments-that-create-every-employee-experience/?sh=45693f5866c6,
Accessed on March 30, 2022
Morgan, J., 2016a. The Employee Experience Equation. Forbes.
Available Online at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2016/02/25/the-employee-experience
-equation/?sh=480a204498bf, Accessed on April 07, 2022
Morgan, J., 2016b. Humanizing the Workforce with Technology.
Available Online at: https://www.citrix.com/content/dam/citrix/en_us/documents/white-paper/human
izing-the-workforce-with-technology.pdf, Accessed on April 07, 2022
Morgan, J., 2017. The Employee Experience Advantage: How to
Win the War for Talent by Giving Employees the Workspaces They Want, the Tools
They Need, and a Culture They Can Celebrate. John Wiley & Sons
Morgan, J., 2018. The Technological
Environment in Employee Experience. Leader to Leader, Volume
87, pp. 28–35
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
2021. Teleworking in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Trends and Prospects. Available
Online at: https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/teleworking-in-the-covid-19-pandemic-trends-and-prospects-72a416b6/,
Accessed on March 30, 2022
Paez, A. 2017. Gray Literature: An Important Resource in Systematic
Reviews. Journal of Evidence?Based Medicine, Volume 10(3), pp.
233–240
Petticrew, M., Roberts, H., 2008. Systematic Reviews in the
Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Hoboken, NJ:
USA
Plaskoff, J., 2017. Employee
Experience: The New Human Resource Management Approach. Strategic HR
Review, Volume 16(3), pp. 136–141
Prajapati, G., Pandey, S., 2020. Enhancing Employee Experience
During Covid-19: A Qualitative Study on Investment Banks. International
Journal of Modern Agriculture, Volume 9(3), pp. 1711–1734.
Available Online at: http://www.modern-journals.com/index.php/ijma/article/view/354,
Accessed on March 30, 2022
Raia, M., 2017. Providing a Better Digital Experience for
Employees. Strategic HR Review, Volume 16(2), pp. 71–75
Robertson, J., 2018. Digital Employee
Experience is Where the Action Will Be. Available Online at: https://www.cmswire.com/digital-workplace/digital-employee-experienc
e-is-where-the-action-will-be/, Accessed on March 31, 2022
Srinivasan, S., 2022. The Great Resignation, Human Experiences and
the Digitization Challenge. Forbes.
Available Online at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusine
ssdevelopmentcouncil/2022/02/22/the-great-resignation-human-experiences-and-the-digitization-challenge/?sh=67008b7264ba
, Accessed on April 15, 2022
Sudrajat, D., Larasati, A., Farmania, A.,
Caesar, L.A.Y., Moeke, D., 2021. Does Digital Employee Experience Matters
for Employee Service Orientation, Ambidexterity, and Agility?. In: The
2021 12th International Conference on E-business, Management and Economics, Volume
2021, pp. 672–677
Syahchari, D.H., Herlina, M.G., Saroso, H.,
Sudrajat, D., Jordaan, H.K., 2021, August. The Influence of Digital Employee
Experience and Employee Agility: Do They Boost Firm’s Effectiveness? In: 2021
International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech), Volume
1, pp. 67–71
The Josh Bersin Company, 2021. The
Definitive Guide: Employee Experience. Commissioned by Microsoft.
ThoughtFarmer Intranet Blog, 2022. What is
the Digital Employee Experience. ThoughtFarmer
Intranet Blog. Available Online at: https://www.thoughtfarmer.com/
blog/what-is-the-digital-employee-experience/, Accessed on April 15, 2022
Utami, H, Alamanos, E., 2021.
Resource-Based Theory. Theoryhub.
Available Online at: https://open.ncl.ac.uk/theories/4/resource-based-theory/,
Accessed on February 20, 2022
Wilson, J., 2022. How to Combat the Great
Resignation through Better Employee Experience. Oracle Fusion Cloud Human Capital Management Blog. Available Online
at: https://blogs.oracle.com/oraclehcm/post/how-to-combat-the-great-resignation-thro
ugh-better-employee-experience, Accessed on March 07, 2022
Wohlin, C., Kalinowski, M., Felizardo, K.R., Mendes, E., 2022.
Successful Combination of Database Search and Snowballing for Identification of
Primary Studies in Systematic Literature Studies. Information and
Software Technology, Volume 147, p. 106908
Zel, S., Kongar, E., 2020. Transforming Digital
Employee Experience with Artificial Intelligence. In: 2020 IEEE/ITU
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Good (AI4G)
Zucker, J., Rome, J., Sivak, M., Stavsky, G.,
2020. Elevating
the Workforce Experience: The Digital Lens. Deloitte Development LLC.
Available Online at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/human-capital/us-elevating-the-workforce -experience.pdf, Accessed on March 07, 2022