Het verband tussen technostress en duurzame inzetbaarheid: Doet leeftijd ertoe?
Publication date
2020-12
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
cc_by_nc_nd
Abstract
Advancing digitalization and technological innovation in work can evoke stress. In an organization operating in the technical sector we examined to what extent sustainable employability relates to experiencing technostress. In addition, we investigated the possible influence of age for this relationship. For technostress, a distinction is made between five different dimensions, namely: techno-overload, techno-invasion, techno-complexity, techno-insecurity and techno-uncertainty. Sustainable employability is measured with three major pillars: work ability, employability and vitality. For this study, 158 respondents gave their opinion. The results reveal that technostress is only to a slight extent negatively related to sustainable employability. Sustainable employability is only partially related with age: Older workers experience lower employability than younger workers. However, their experienced work ability does not differ from that of younger workers. We found no relationship between age and vitality. The influence of age on the relationship between technostress and sustainable employability is also limited. All in all, this study shows that the consequences of technostress for sustainable employability are small. However, one must be alert for overload due to technology and prevent the invasion of technology. Calendar age does not seem to play a significant role. For future research, other conceptualizations of age could be considered.
Keywords
Age, Employability, Sustainable employability, Technostress, Vitality, Work ability, Social Psychology, Strategy and Management, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
Citation
van Vuuren, T, Peeters, M C W, Pareja Diaz, S & van Veen, B 2020, 'Het verband tussen technostress en duurzame inzetbaarheid : Doet leeftijd ertoe?', Gedrag en Organisatie, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 300-323. https://doi.org/10.5117/2020.033.004.003