Purpose In the post-pandemic world of work, millions of employees now work from home. To advance knowledge of remote work and employee experiences, more research is needed to directly compare remote versus in-person work. Design/methodology/approach This study included 511 employees across different jobs and industries to compare perceptions of person-environment (P-E) fit, experiences of work and important outcomes for remote versus in-person workers. Findings Using a multi-group structural equation model, we found that P-E fit was an important predictor regardless of work arrangement, but burnout was a particularly important indirect effect for remote workers’ performance and turnover, whereas engagement was more critical for in-person workers. Our findings suggest that some prior differences between remote and in-person work may be phasing out in the post-pandemic world, with P-E fit remaining a critical factor in all work arrangements. Originality/value This study offers insights by empirically testing the effects of work arrangements, comparing in-person and remote work modes. We adopt an integrative theoretical lens that connects career sustainability theory with well-established literature on the interactive dynamics between person and environment – specifically, P-E fit and the job demands–resources theory. We examine the antecedents, outcomes and boundary conditions of sustainable careers by investigating the roles of PE fit and remote work arrangements in shaping the sustainability of individuals’ work experiences, operationalized as work–life balance, job engagement and burnout.
Fan et al. (Tue,) studied this question.