KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL

Running head: EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
Constant Connectivity as a Cause of Stress: The Implications of Email Norms for
Employees and Organizations
Capstone Paper Submitted for the Master of Professional Studies Degree in
Human Resources Management
Georgetown University
By
Kathryn Patel
Spring 2015

Master of Professional Studies in Human Resources Management
Capstone Authenticity Statement
Name: Kathryn Patel
Word count: 19,841
I confirm that:
 Please
check
statement
 I haveread the University’s rulesrelating to plagiarism asfound on the
Georgetown Universitywebsite.

 I amawareof the University’sdisciplinary regulationsconcerning conductin
examinationspertaining to submission of assignments and,in particular,of the
regulationson plagiarism.

 I haveread and am awareof and understand theGeorgetown University honor
code.

 The CapstonepaperIamsubmitting is entirely my own workexceptwhere
otherwiseindicated.

 It hasnotbeen submitted,eitherwholly or substantially,foranothercourseof
this DepartmentorUniversity,or fora courseat any otherinstitution.

 I haveclearly signalled thepresence of quoted orparaphrased materialand
referenced all sources.

 I haveacknowledged appropriately any assistanceIhavereceived in addition to
thatprovided by my advisor.

 I havenotsoughtassistancefromany professionalagency. 
Signed:
Date: April 21, 2015

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS i
Acknowledgements
The submission of this Capstone was made possible because of the support of Emily
Winick and Professor Cumberlander. It is also important to acknowledge the editing skills of
Elizabeth Ellison. Finally, I would like to thank my husband Gautam Patel for all of his
encouragement throughout my time at Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies.

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS ii
Kathryn Patel
Master of Professional Studies in Human Resources Management
Spring 2015
Abstract
Email serves as a primary means of communication within the business world. Email offers the
ability for users to connect with each other at any time and in any location. Although the
benefits of email communication are plentiful, there are also several disadvantages. Specifically,
excessive use of email is linked to stress. Stress is correlated with poor health outcomes at an
individual level, which can lead to reduced productivity at an organizational level. This
Capstone posits that organizational norms are the genesis of email-related stress and its
associated outcomes and seeks to elucidate what actions the field of Human Resources can take
in order to mitigate the stress-related outcomes of constant email activity. Further, this Capstone
takes a thematic approach to understanding the relationship between organizational norms,
constant email connectivity, stress, health, and productivity. Finally, this Capstone intends to
provide actionable recommendations that are geared toward Human Resources professionals who
seek to alleviate email-related stress in employee populations. Specifically, the use of normative
re-educative strategy is recommended in order to facilitate a shift in email behavior within
employee populations.
Keywords: organizational norms, email, stress, health, productivity, constant
connectivity, normative re-educative strategy

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS iii
Table of Contents
Introduction…………………………………….………………………………………………….1
Scope............................................................................................................................................... 3
Aims................................................................................................................................................ 4
Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 5
Justification..................................................................................................................................... 5
Limitations ...................................................................................................................................... 6
Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 6
An Overview of Email Stress and Associated Outcomes ........................................................... 7
The Theoretical Foundations of Technology’s Relationship to Stress ..................................... 10
The Role of Organizational Norms in Constant Connectivity.................................................. 12
The Gap Between the Problem of Constant Connectivity and HR........................................... 14
Literature Review Conclusion................................................................................................... 15
Methodology................................................................................................................................. 16
Results........................................................................................................................................... 17
Chapter One: Email Norms Impact Employees and Organizations.............................................. 21
The Origins of Email..................................................................................................................... 22
Email in the Business Community................................................................................................ 22
Increased Accessibility in the Era of Mobile Devices .................................................................. 23

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS iv
Constant Connectivity................................................................................................................... 24
Incongruent Findings Around How Constant Connectivity Impacts Employees ......................... 25
Understanding What Drives Constant Connectivity..................................................................... 26
How Email Norms Inform Email Practices .................................................................................. 28
Synchronous and Asynchronous Communication........................................................................ 30
How Email Practices Can Lead to Stress...................................................................................... 31
Work-Related Stress ..................................................................................................................... 32
Health Outcomes of Stress............................................................................................................ 33
Productivity Implications of Stress............................................................................................... 34
Chapter One Conclusion............................................................................................................... 35
Chapter Two: Theoretical Underpinnings of Norms, Constant Connectivity, and Stress ............ 36
Why Employees Adopt Behaviors................................................................................................ 37
Telepressure .................................................................................................................................. 39
Cycle of Responsiveness............................................................................................................... 39
Technostress.................................................................................................................................. 41
Techno-Overload....................................................................................................................... 43
Techno-Invasion........................................................................................................................ 44
The Effort Recovery Model.......................................................................................................... 45
Chapter Two Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 47

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS v
Chapter Three: Shifting Email Norms to Mitigate Stress and its Associated Outcomes.............. 49
Volkswagen’s Approach to Addressing Constant Connectivity................................................... 50
Boston Consulting Group’s Approach to Addressing Constant Connectivity.............................. 50
Arguments Against PTO Practices ............................................................................................... 54
Adopting the BCG Approach........................................................................................................ 55
Normative Re-Educative strategy................................................................................................. 56
Chapter Three Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 59
Recommendations......................................................................................................................... 60
Diagnosing Readiness and Necessity of Change ...................................................................... 60
Normative Re-Educative Strategy Coupled with PTO Practices .............................................. 61
Build Alliances to Support the Shift in Normative Email Behavior ......................................... 64
Cost Implications .......................................................................................................................... 65
Capstone Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 66

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS vi
List of Acronyms
APA – American Psychological Association
ARPANET – Advanced Research Project Agency Network
BCG – Boston Consulting Group
HR – Human Resources
ICT – Information and Communication Technology
NIOSH - National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
PTO – Predictable Time Off
SHRM – Society for Human Resource Management

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS vii
Research Overview
ResearchProblem: Organizational norms that encourage constant email connectivity can create
stress for employees, resulting in poor health outcomes at an individual level and reduced
productivity at an organizational level.
ResearchQuestion: How can the field of HR mitigate the stress-related outcomes of constant
email connectivity in employee populations?
Thesis Statement: In partnership with employees and leadership teams, the field of HR can
mitigate the stress-related outcomes of constant email connectivity through the crafting of
healthy norms around email behavior.

EMAIL NORMS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS 1
Email currently serves as a primary means of communication within the business world
(Purcell & Rainie, 2014). As a tool for communication, business email has become so
ubiquitous that it permeates various realms in the lives of employees across the globe. For
example, in their 2013 study of 1,376 Australian workers, Pockock and Skinner (2013) found
that a quarter of managerial and professional respondents check their email before breakfast each
morning. Similar behaviors were found in the United States by the American Psychological
Association (APA) in their study of 1,084 adults, 54% of those who reported checking email
when on sick leave (2013). Employees’ compulsions to respond to work email may be partially
borne out of its ease of use (Beals, 2013). Email, after all, is a tool that can facilitate
communication with anyone at any time of the day or night (Mazmanian, 2013). Further, ease of
use has increased with the proliferation of the smartphone, enabling employees to have access in
the palms of their hands (Alpert, 2014).
While email is a convenient and instantly accessible form of communication, it is not
without its drawbacks. Specifically, email as a tool for communication can prove problematic
because it constantly disrupts employees, forcing them to switch tasks and break concentration
(Friedman, 2014). Additionally, because email is so easily accessible, employees are often
perceived as reachable virtually anywhere and at any time (Mazmanian, 2013). The perception
that employees are reachable, and thus available, blurs the lines between home and work, as
employees increasingly borrow from time in their private lives in order to engage in work
activities (Deal, 2013). This scenario represents constant connectivity, whereby employees are

constantly connected to their work activities vis-à-vis technological offerings such as email
(Wajcman & Rose, 2011; Mazmanian, 2013).
Email’s ability to constantly interrupt and disrupt the balance between work and life
proves taxing for employees by inducing stress (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Kushlev & Dunn,
2014; Yun, Kettinger & Lee, 2012). Stress, in turn, negatively impacts employee health (Cohen,
Janicki-Deverts, Doyle, Miller, Frank, Rabin, & Turner, 2012). Further, reduced levels of health
are linked to reduced productivity (Cole & Neumayer, 2005). Therefore, this Capstone posits
that a causal relationship exists between constant connectivity, stress, poor health, and reduced
productivity. Specifically, organizational norms that encourage constant email connectivity can
create job stress for employees, resulting in poor health outcomes at an individual level and
reduced productivity at an organizational level. Given this linkage, the question becomes, how
can the field of Human Resources (HR) mitigate the stress-related outcomes of constant email
connectivity in employee populations? This Capstone posits that the answer to this question is
found in the argument that the field of HR can, in partnership with employees and leadership
teams, mitigate the stress related outcomes of constant email connectivity through the crafting of
healthy norms around email behavior.
This Capstone argues that organizational norms around email behavior serve as the
foundation for the concept of constant connectivity, which then results in increased stress,
diminished health, and reduced productivity. In order to mitigate the effects of the cause, HR
practitioners should work to shift those norms via normative re-educative strategy in partnership
with employees and leadership teams. This Capstone explores the concept of constant
connectivity, its consequences, and how it can be mitigated via normative re-educative strategy.
This exploration takes place in three chapters. The first chapter elucidates the history of email,

how it has evolved, and why constant connectivity proves problematic. The second chapter
explores the theoretical concepts that underpin the practical problems presented in the first
chapter. The third chapter provides specific and feasible recommendations that can assist in
addressing the problem of constant connectivity. In providing recommendations, the intent of
this Capstone is to aid the HR community in addressing the widespread problem of
organizational norms that drive constant connectivity. By addressing this problem, HR
practitioners can assist in the reduction of employees’ stress levels, positively impacting both
health and productivity. In order for HR practitioners to address this problem holistically, it is
recommended that they do so in partnership with employees and leadership teams in order to
craft healthy norms around email behavior.
Scope
The scope of this Capstone is to examine the concept of constant connectivity and its
implications for employees and organizations. This examination takes place in three chapters
and reviews the implications of constant connectivity from 1984 through present. In the first
chapter, this examination considers the history of email and its prevalence throughout the
business community. Next, this examination explores the concepts that underpin constant
connectivity and identifies organizational norms as a key driver of constant connectivity.
Further, this examination consists of a review of how constant connectivity is linked to stress.
Additionally, this examination reviews literature around how stress is then linked to poor health
outcomes, which have implications for organizational productivity. In the second chapter, this
examination delves into the various theories and models that provide a better understanding of
the behaviors around constant connectivity. By taking this approach in the second chapter, this

Capstone seeks to help readers understand the practical problem of constant connectivity and its
implications in the context of its theoretical underpinnings. The third chapter entails concrete
and feasible practices that can be taken within the field of HR in order to address the problems
associated with constant connectivity. This Capstone examines the problem of constant
connectivity and its implications for a vast range of occupations in both the public and private
sectors and draws upon scholarship from around the world.
Aims
This Capstone has theoretical, methodological and practical aims. From a theoretical
perspective, this Capstone aims to draw upon the theories of techno-stress, techno-overload,
techno-invasion, telepressure, and the cycle of responsiveness in order to provide the reader with
the concepts that underpin the relationship between overexposure to email and stress (Brod,
1984; Tarafdar, Tu, B. Ragu-Nathan, and T. Ragu-Nathan (2007); Barber & Santuzzi, 2014;
Perlow, 2012). This Capstone also draws upon Kelman’s (1958) processes regarding the
implications of social influences to explain the relationship between normative behavior and
email practices. Further, this Capstone examines the effort recovery model (Meijman & Mulder,
1998) in order to explain the need for employees to disconnect from their work email accounts.
The methodological aims of this Capstone are to draw upon scholarly research that pertains to
key findings around the practical and research problems. Further, this Capstone aims to analyze
both qualitative and quantitative data that provide insight into the phenomena of norms, constant
connectivity, stress, health, and productivity. Included in such data are exploratory,
ethnographic, correlational, and case studies. From a practical perspective, the aim of this
Capstone is to bring greater awareness to the problem of constant connectivity, its relationship to

organizational norms, and its implications for employees and organizations. In bringing
awareness, the greater aim is to provide concrete and actionable recommendations that can be
utilized by the field of HR in order to mitigate the problem and its associated outcomes.
Objectives
The objectives of this Capstone are fourfold. The first objective is to describe the
normative behavior that gives rise to email-related stress. The second objective is to explain the
connection between email-related stress, health outcomes, and productivity. The third objective
is to detail the theoretical constructs that elucidate how normative behavior impacts individual
email practices. The fourth objective is to present feasible recommendations that the field of HR
can take in order to mitigate the problems associated with constant connectivity.
Justification
The justification of this Capstone is rooted in the acknowledgement that the average
business email user sends and receives over 120 email messages per day (Radicati, 2014). This
constant flow of email proves problematic for employees because it represents a never-ending
task list, disrupts activities, and blurs the lines between work and home activities (Barley,
Meyerson & Grodal, 2011). Despite the problems that constant connectivity can pose for
employees, a gap remains between the practical problem and how the field of HR is currently
addressing it. This gap is demonstrated in a 2012 survey of HR professionals that was conducted
by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) (2012); less than a quarter of HR
professionals provided any formal policy regarding work-related email use after working hours.
Further, only 26% of respondents to the SHRM survey reported that they provided informal

guidance regarding email-related activities during non-working hours (SHRM, 2012).
Therefore, the justification is found in the acknowledgement that the problem is salient in the
contemporary business community, but not widely addressed by the field of HR.
Limitations
The limitations of this Capstone include the fact that it does not contain primary research.
The lack of primary research is due to time constraints. An additional limitation is the
acknowledgement that there is limited scholarly research regarding the email activities of
organizations that have taken measures to mitigate constant connectivity. The work of Perlow
(2012) is an exception to this limitation. The third limitation of this Capstone is the fact that it
does not differentiate between sectors and positions. This lack of differentiation may serve as a
limitation because it does not clearly delineate why certain employees in certain positions and
fields are more susceptible to constant connectivity.
Literature Review
This Literature Review identifies the research problem as one that entails organizational
norms as the basis for constant connectivity, which results in stress, poor health, and reduced
productivity. Given the identification of this problem, a relevant question within the field of HR
is, how can the field of HR mitigate email-related stress to prevent or reduce its negative
outcomes? This Literature Review suggests that the field of HR can, in partnership with
employees and leadership teams, work to mitigate email-related stress and its associated
outcomes by crafting healthy organizational norms and expectations with regard to work-related
email use. Further, this Literature Review proposes that one method to shift organizational

norms around email use is through normative re-educative strategy. This Literature Review
synthesizes scholarly research around the relationship between organizational norms that
encourage constant email connectivity, resulting in job stress, poor individual health outcomes,
and reduced organizational productivity. The primary purpose of this Literature Review is to
examine email-related stress from a thematic perspective, elucidating the multiple theories that
exist within this context. Doing so should help the reader understand both the causes and effects
of email-related stress. In order to narrow the body of literature examined, only literature
involving the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) published within the
past 31 years is included in the review. Following the thematic examination of email-related
stress, this Literature Review will address the gap between the problem and how it is being
addressed within the field of HR.
An Overview of Email Stress and Associated Outcomes
The spread of email use throughout the business world began taking place throughout the
1990s and continues into the first part of the 21st century (Hafner, 2001; Fallows, 2002). Email
has changed the way that employees communicate and interact, insofar that it offers an
instantaneous platform for communication (Mark, Voida, & Cardello, 2012). As a result of the
proliferation of email, employees are able to conduct business at any time and in almost any
location (MacDonald, 2014). While there are numerous benefits to such easily accessible
communication tools, there are also negative repercussions that impact employees and
organizations. Specifically, because employees are reachable at any time of day or night, they
are constantly connected to their work lives, even when engaging in non-work-related activities
at home (Deal, 2013). Further, email can serve as an interruption to employees, as it constantly
distracts employees from one task, pulling them into completing another (Freidman, 2014).

The utility of email is found in the belief that it enables employees to work anywhere and
at any time (Mazmanian, 2013). Yet, the concept of anywhere, any time has morphed into one
where employees feel the pull to work constantly, evolving into a state where they are always
reachable, and thus always available to engage in work activities (Mazmanian, 2013). As
previously mentioned, the notion of constant connectivity is rooted in the scenario whereby
employees are constantly engaged in work activities because of technological offerings,
including email (MacDonald, 2014). The concept of being constantly connected to work via
email is one that has been explored by numerous scholars, each of whom put forth various
rationales to explain what drives employees to stay constantly connected to their work email
accounts (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Mazmanian & Erickson, 2014; Kolb, Caza, & Collins,
2012). Mazmanian and Erickson (2014) posited that economic rationales prompt employees to
stay connected. In that argument, employees must stay connected to work via email because
their connection to clients is offered by their organizations as product offering (Mazmanian &
Erickson, 2014). Kolb et al. (2012) cited actor agency as one driver of constant connectivity and
suggested that individuals stay connected as an individual choice. Barber and Santuzzi (2014)
examined the role that organizational norms play in constant connectivity and argued that it is
partially a product of employees’ desires to adhere to organizational norms. In this argument,
employees adopt the normative email behavior of the organization and thus seek to build
relationships and manage others’ impressions of them (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). While each of
the aforementioned rationales for explaining constant connectivity are noteworthy, Barber and
Santuzzi’s (2014) work around organizational norms is particularly germane because it appears
linked to the research of Turner, Grube, Tinsley, Lee, and O’Pell (2006) whose study of 88
employees found a positive relationship between higher email usage rates and better performance

ratings. Therefore, employees may stay connected to work email at all hours in order to engage
in impression management, whereby they are accepted by their peers and deemed effective in
their jobs (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Turner et al., 2006). Regardless of the differences in
opinion regarding what drives constant connectivity, it can result in prolonged workdays and
stress (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Mazmanian, 2013; Kushlev & Dunn, 2014; Yun et al., 2012).
Prolonged workdays result in stress because they take away from the time during which
employees can engage in non-work activities that are essential to health (Meijman & Mulder,
1998). The production of stress as a result of inadequate non-working periods is understood in
the context of the effort recovery model whereby employees must take periods of rest in order to
sustain their health (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). In the effort recovery model, employee health is
engendered when employees take breaks from work activities in order to mitigate the stress-
related outcomes of exerting effort associated with prolong periods of work which can lead to
stress (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). Workplace stress poses a problem to the workforce in that it
is linked to numerous negative outcomes, including poor health and productivity loss (Newton &
Teo, 2014).
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1999) stated that workplace
stress is characterized by unfavorable mental and physical responses that are generated as a result
of conditions at work. Workplace stress can occur when an employee perceives an incongruity
between the requirements of his or her work and his or her ability to adequately respond to those
requirements (Babatunde, 2013). From a health perspective, workplace stress has consequences
for employees that range from depression to heart disease (Cartwright & Cooper, 1997; APA,
2010). An individual employee’s workplace stress experiences impact the organizations by
which he or she is employed. For example, Adams (2009) argued that increased stress results in

profit loss as it is linked to poor health outcomes which result in increased health care
expenditures for organizations. Additionally, profit loss can occur as a byproduct of poor health
due to the latter’s ability to cause absenteeism and presenteeism (Cooper & Dewey, 2008;
Stewart, Ricci, Chee, Hahn, & Morganstein, 2003).
This problem is significant and relevant to the business community in general, and to the
field of HR in particular, because email has become such an integral part of how businesses
operate. Yet there is a complex relationship between the email tools that enable employees to
work more capably and the consequences (namely stress) that employees who utilize them
experience (Mazmanian, Orlikowski, & Yates, 2013). As previously stated, those consequences
range from anger and depression to cardiovascular disease at the individual level (APA, 2010;
Cartwright & Cooper, 1997), which then create organizational productivity implications
including presenteeism, where employees engage in work although they are unhealthy, and
absenteeism, which entails employees’ absence from work, (Cooper & Dewey, 2008; Stewart et
al., 2003). While this problem is relevant and practical, it does have theoretical foundations
which beget a greater understanding as to why and how it takes place.
The Theoretical Foundations of Technology’s Relationship to Stress
Brod (1984) first explored technology-induced workplace stress, where he introduced the
term technostress to describe the stress that results when individuals are not able to utilize newly
introduced computer technologies in a healthy manner. Given the rapid expansion of computer
technology in the workplace throughout the 1980s and 1990s and into the 21st century, it is not
surprising that a body of literature that explored the relationship between technology use and
stress emerged. Brod (1984) argued that technostress can manifest in one of two ways. The first
manifestation of technostress can emerge when employees struggle to accept and interact with

technologies (Brod, 1984). The second manifestation of technostress takes place when
employees overly-identify with technology (Brod, 1984). In the second scenario, employees
allow technology to play a central role in their lives, resulting in constant work which is driven
by the technological offerings available (Brod, 1984). This Literature Review focuses on the
scenario where employees overly-identify with technology. Included in that body of literature is
research that investigated the specific triggers of technostress. The concept of technostress can,
therefore, be examined at the level of its sub-concepts within the larger theory.
Tarafdar et al. (2007) illustrated this collection of conditions that creates the
subcategories of technostress. This Literature Review will focus on two of those subcategories.
The first condition, techno-overload, describes users who are overwhelmed by the amount of
information that is available to them because of advances in information and communication
technology (ICT) (Tarafdar et al., 2007). The theory of techno-overload applies when the
presence of technology creates the perception that employees are pressured to work more
quickly, work with shorter deadlines, and change work habits to adapt to new technological
offerings (Tarafdar et al., 2007). The stress-related effects of techno-overload occur when users
are so overwhelmed by the amount of information that is available to them that their ability to
make decisions diminishes, their attention spans decrease, and they fail to memorize information
(Salanova, Llorens, & Cifre, 2013).
Tarafdar et al. (2007) developed the term techno-invasion to describe the phenomenon
that occurs when an employee is constantly connected to his or her work life due to the advent of
ICTs. Techno-invasion results when the user’s personal life is impacted, or invaded, by his or
her work life because of constant connectivity (Tarafdar et al., 2007). The impacts of techno-
invasion are multifaceted. Barber and Jenkins (2013) explored the impact of work-related ICT

use in the home in a study of 315 participants and found that work-related ICT use at home
impacted the quality of sleep for individuals due to their inability to psychologically disengage
from their work-related communications when trying to fall asleep. According to Yun et al.
(2012), the rise of ICT use at home produces conflict for employees when work-related tasks
direct them away from activities in their personal lives during non-work hours. While the work
of Brod (1984) and Tarafdar et al. (2007) speaks broadly to technology’s impact on employee
stress, their research also pertains to email more specifically in that email creates stress for
employees because it can overwhelm employees with distractions and also bleed their work-
related activities into their personal lives (Mazmanian, 2013; Barley et al., 2011). Given the
arguments that overexposure to technology can result in stress, it is necessary to examine why
employees engage in these behaviors despite their stress inducing outcomes. That examination
leads to the work of Barber and Santuzzi (2014) who argue that employees may engage with
technology constantly in order to build relationships and manage others’ impressions.
The Role of Organizational Norms in Constant Connectivity
The concepts of techno-overload and techno-invasion are similar in that they both entail
the creation of stress because of excess. Techno-overload takes place when employees are
exposed to excessive information; techno-invasion results when employees are exposed to
excessive connectivity, and thus, reachability (Tarafdar et al., 2007). Although these two sub-
concepts of technostress involve different triggers and different outcomes, they are similar in that
they both illustrate the increasingly salient viewpoint that employees need be both accessible and
respondent as a result of ICT use (Yun et al., 2012). This can create stress for employees
because they feel pressure to be both technologically accessible and respondent at all times even
when faced with multiple competing priorities (Barley et al., 2011; Barber & Santuzzi, 2014).

Barber and Santuzzi (2014) introduced the term telepressure to describe the pressure that
exists for employees to engage in work-related ICT communications constantly and to respond to
messages quickly. The concept of telepressure is a hybrid of techno-overload and techno-
invasion because of the emphasis placed on accessibility and responsiveness. However, the
concept of telepressure differs from the two aforementioned concepts because it explores how
employees perceive themselves within the context of work-related pressures that may result in
stress outcomes (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Specifically, telepressure links employee behavior
surrounding ICT use to prevailing organizational norms. According to Jones (1998) norms are
standards that are considered accepted and agreed-upon by a group of people. Norms are
typically not written or formalized, but serve as unspoken beliefs that come to fruition over time
and inform how members within a group behave (Jones, 1998). Although norms are not
formalized policies, they do elicit specific behaviors by members of the group. When those
norms entail high levels of employee accessibility and responsiveness due to ICT use, individual
employees are more likely to engage in those behaviors in an attempt to conform to that
normative behavior (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Therefore, telepressure is similar to the concept
of peer pressure in that both elicit behaviors by individual members of a group in their effort to
be accepted by the group as a whole. In this sense, telepressure impacts employees when they
allow the perceptions of their coworkers to inform their behavior as it pertains to ICT use
(Barber & Santuzzi, 2014).
Telepressure is similar to technostress and its subcategories of techno-overload and
techno-invasion in that there are stress implications for all. Barber and Santuzzi’s (2014)
research concerning telepressure, however, is unique in that it delineates how prolonged stress
results when employees are expected to be accessible and responsive to requests during both

working and nonworking hours because they feel pressured to do so in order to be accepted vis-
à-vis the practice of normative email behavior. Barber and Santuzzi (2014) further argued that
prolonged exposure to stress as a result of telepressure has negative implications for both
physical and psychological health, including emotional exhaustion.
The Gap Between the Problem of Constant Connectivity and HR
A review of the literature regarding email-related workplace stress suggests that there is a
gap between the problem and how it is currently addressed by the field of HR. Barber and
Santuzzi (2014) contended that email-related stress is a problem that businesses can work to
mitigate through the creation of organizational norms around email behavior. This argument was
rooted in their assertion that employees adopt normative email behavior in order to build
relationships with peers (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). The field of HR can play a central role in
the creation and communication of email norms in order to foster a healthier working
environment as it pertains to email use. In doing so, HR is poised to impact email usage
behavior within employee populations.
Organizational culture is personified by the behavioral norms and attitudes of those who
belong to the organization (Nadler, 2006). According to Kachru (2010), the field of HR is
uniquely positioned to inform organizational culture because HR practices embody the
prevailing values of the organization. HR practitioners can, therefore, be influential in mitigating
email-related workplace stress by setting the organizational norms and expectations that give rise
to its existence. Although the field of HR can be influential in informing organizational norms, it
should also be noted that leadership and individual employees must also support stress-reduction
attempts in order to be successful (Bhagat, Segovis, & Nelson, 2012). In partnership with
leadership and employees, HR practitioners can facilitate the creation of healthy norms

surrounding email use by communicating an organizational commitment to employee health and
by also embodying that commitment in practice. One method in order to shift norms is through
normative re-educative strategy, whereby the prevailing organizational beliefs are shifted in
order to produce intended behaviors (Bennis, Benne, & Chin, 1984). In doing so, HR
practitioners have the opportunity to impact employee health outcomes and organizational
effectiveness.
Literature Review Conclusion
Workplace stress is a phenomenon linked to poor physical and psychological health
outcomes for employees (Cartwright & Cooper, 1997). Those health outcomes threaten
organizational success because they lead to reduced productivity (Cooper & Dewey, 2008;
Stewart et al. 2003). Workplace stress has many drivers, and excessive email use is among them
(Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). The expansion of email use in the workplace has enabled businesses
and their employees to conduct business more rapidly. However, although these advances have
enabled increased communication and organizational capability, they have also resulted in
increased stress levels for employees (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014; Barber & Santuzzi, 2014).
Because email-related stress is linked to negative health outcomes for employees, there is risk in
not addressing unhealthy behaviors surrounding email use. That risk entails an erosion of
individual employee health and therefore organizational effectiveness. Although the risks
associated with not addressing the problem may seem straightforward, addressing the problem of
email workplace stress is complex.
The complexity of this problem arises in the acknowledgement that there are multiple
facets to consider when examining the proliferation of email use within employee populations.
One argument is that the use of email has allowed for increased connectivity and accessibility,

which foster increased efficacy (Mazmanian et al., 2013). Conversely, the excessive use of
email is counterproductive because of its ability to induce stress in the forms of techno-overload,
techno-invasion, and telepressure (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Tarafdar et al., 2007). Therefore,
the problem becomes more complex when trying to strike a balance between healthy and
unhealthy email behaviors. The purpose of finding the balance is to optimize the efficacy of
available email platforms without allowing them to adversely impact the health of users. A
review of the literature suggests that there is a gap between the problem and how the field of HR
is addressing it. Barber and Santuzzi (2014) contended that setting organizational norms
surrounding ICT use could foster healthier behaviors. The field of HR has an opportunity to play
a central role in the creation and communication of those norms because of its unique ability to
impact organizational culture (Kachru, 2010). Organizational leadership and employee
populations, in partnership with the field of HR, are also poised to make an impact on
organizational norms as they pertain to email use.
Methodology
This Capstone takes a mixed-method approach to reviewing both qualitative and
quantitative data around organizational norms, constant connectivity, stress, health and
productivity. Included in this Capstone are five key studies: an exploratory study, two
correlational studies, a mixed-method study that contains employee interviews, and a case study.
In addition to the aforementioned key studies, this Capstone draws upon salient scholarly
research as well as research from trade organizations such as SHRM and APA. Further, this
Capstone incorporates pertinent medical research studies. Each source was chosen in order to

provide insight into the issues of organizational norms, constant connectivity, stress, health, and
productivity.
Results
As mentioned in the previous section, this Capstone draws upon five key studies. The
first of those is an exploratory study performed by Kushlev and Dunn (2014). In their two-week
study of 124 adults, Kushlev and Dunn (2014) provided quantitative backing to the claim that
email overexposure causes stress. This study began with 142 randomly selected participants
who responded to a call for research subjects who received excessive email. By the time the
study ended, there were 124 participants because 18 participants dropped out. Kushlev and
Dunn (2014) designed the study so that the participants spent one week in an unlimited email
condition and the other in a limited email condition. In the unlimited condition, participants
were told to keep their email inboxes open throughout the day, checking and responding to
emails as frequently as they normally would (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). In the limited condition,
participants were told to check their inboxes only three times per day and to keep their inboxes
closed for the remainder of the day (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). Not surprisingly, even in the
limited condition, participants were unable or unwilling to limit their email checking to only
three times per day and found themselves checking it over four times per day on average
(Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). Further, participants checked their email over three times as often in
the unlimited condition as the limited condition (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). At the completion of
each day of the two-week study, participants filled out surveys in order to self-report on their
own stress levels using a Likert scale. The self-reported levels of stress were higher during days
in which they had unlimited access to email (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014). The inclusion of this
study serves as the basis for the linkage between email and associated stress outcomes.

The second key piece of research utilized in this Capstone consisted of a correlational
study that linked email use to performance by comparing self-reported email behavior to
performance appraisal ratings in a group of 88 employees at a multi-national telecommunications
firm (Turner et al., 2006). This study started with a survey that was sent to 115 employees. Of
the 115 who were sent the survey, 88 participants responded. Turner et al. (2006) hypothesized
that a positive association between employee adherence to organizational email norms and
performance evaluations would exist in this group of 88 employees. The means to validate this
hypothesis was a survey where employees were asked to self-identify their own use of email on a
Likert scale from one to five, with one indicative of using email rarely and five indicative of
using email almost constantly. Turner et al. (2006) then asked the supervisors of the surveyed
employees to fill out a performance appraisal of their respective subordinates, which also
included a Likert scale. Turner et al. (2006) then analyzed the two data sets and found that
employees who adhered to organizational norms regarding email use were awarded with higher
performance appraisal ratings than those who did not, suggesting a correlation between
adherence to email norms and perceived performance. Important to note is that Turner et al.
(2006) controlled for numerous other variables in order to eliminate the possibility of any other
bias that may have influenced the performance ratings. This study serves as the foundation for
the argument that email usage is linked to overall perceptions of employee performance.
The third key study included in this Capstone draws on the research of Barley et al.
(2011) who interviewed 40 managerial and non-managerial employees of an internationally-
recognized technology company. Those interviews included a series of open-ended questions
that sought to gain insight into how email behaviors impact employees. What resulted from
those interviews was the insight that employees perceived robust cultural expectations regarding

email behavior, driving them to respond to emails quickly (Barley et al., 2011). Further, these
interviews provided the insight that those who answered email quickly were perceived to have
strong reputations, suggesting a linkage between email response times and perceived
effectiveness (Barley et al., 2011). This research provides the foundation for the argument that
email behavior is linked to reputation among peers.
The fourth key study included in this Capstone draws upon the work of Barber and
Santuzzi (2014) who introduced the term telepressure as “the combination of a strong urge to be
responsive to people at work through message-based ICTs with a preoccupation with quick
response times” (p. 1). The study of telepressure was conducted through Amazon’s Mechanical
Turk software with a population of 354 participants in the United States. The survey correlated
responses to respondents’ self-reported email behavior to the perceived organizational norms of
their employer organizations via a Likert scale. Barber and Santuzzi (2014) found that the
phenomenon of telepressure was correlated to email response norms, driving employees to stay
connected with and respond quickly to work-related communication (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014).
This study serves as the foundation for the argument that organizational norms inform
individuals’ email behavior.
Finally, this Capstone draws on the Perlow’s (2012) case study of employees at Boston
Consulting Group (BCG) to posit that it is possible to change organizational norms around
constant connectivity. Perlow (2012) detailed this case study by examining one team of six
people at BCG who adopted the practice of Predictable Time Off (PTO) whereby employees
were encouraged to refrain from constant email connectivity. This practicew was anchored in
structured dialogue and team-based goals that encouraged employees to not engage in constant
connectivity. The practice of PTO was so successful that it has spread to over 900 teams across

thirty countries on five continents throughout BCG and has allowed employees to enjoy better
work-life balance while still meeting the needs of their clients (Perlow, 2012). The claim that
better work-life balance can result from the practice of PTO was found in Perlow’s (2012)
argument that 62% of employees who engaged in PTO at BCG’s Boston, New York, and
Washington DC offices reported that they were satisfied with their work-life balance. This
stands in contrast to those who did not engage in PTO practices, as only 38% of those
respondents reported satisfaction with their work-life balance. This case study serves as the
basis for the argument that it is possible to shift organizational norms around constant
connectivity and that in order to do so, it is necessary to build an alliance of employees and
leadership in order to make this shift.

Chapter One: Email Norms Impact Employees and Organizations
Email has been used as a means of communication within the business community for
less than 30 years. In spite of its relatively short history, email has become a dominant
communication medium for the business community (Purcell & Rainie, 2014). This chapter
takes a historical viewpoint of email and illuminates its prominent role in employees’ work and
home lives. Next, this chapter explores the concept of constant connectivity and ultimately
argues that organizational norms are the primary drivers behind the phenomenon. Finally, this
chapter explores the relationships among constant connectivity, stress, health, and productivity.
The primary argument of this chapter is that a causal relationship exists between these variables
that starts with organizational norms, which leads to constant connectivity, then stress, poor
health outcomes, and ultimately, reduced productivity. That causal relationship is depicted in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. The linkage between organizational norms, constant connectivity, stress, poor health,
and reduced productivity. This figure illustrates the causal relationship between these factors in
the context of email behavior.
Organizational
Norms
Constant
Connectivity
Stress Poor Health
Reduced
Productivity

The Origins of Email
Email has a relatively short history. Ray Tomlinson, a computer engineer at Bolt,
Beranek, & Newman, a Cambridge, Massachusetts-based engineering firm, developed email as it
is currently known in 1971 (Hafner, 2001). Tomlinson made it possible to send a message from
one computer to another over a network, enabling individuals to communicate with one another
via computers. Email in its earliest form was used almost exclusively by the U.S. Government,
even before the Internet came into existence (Hafner, 2001). The U.S. Government used email
to communicate official business, on the pre-Internet network called the Advanced Research
Project Agency Network (ARPANET) (Partridge, 2008). ARAPNET was managed and
administered by the United States Department of Defense throughout the 1970s, and email was,
therefore, limited to use by the U.S. Government and a number of research universities
throughout the United States (National Science Foundation, 2015). Throughout the 1970s the
functionality of email improved, including the added ability to both reply to and delete emails
(Hafner, 2001). Despite improvements in functionality and ease of use, email was not widely
used within the business community until well into the 1990s (Hafner, 2001).
Email in the Business Community
The adoption of email into the business community followed suit as the Internet became
widespread and users increasingly accepted and embraced it as a means to exchange information
and conduct business (Hafner, 2001). The growth in Internet use during the past twenty years is
represented by the estimate that usage among adults in the United States grew from 15% in 1994
to 87% in 2014 (Pew Research Center, 2013). Mirroring the history of the Internet, the history
of email is characterized by increased use throughout the 1990s and into the 21st century.

Fallows (2002) estimated that 98% of employed Americans use email as a part of their work.
Email has become so ubiquitous that it was believed to be utilized by 4.1 billion users worldwide
in the year 2014 (Radicati, 2014). While business mailboxes account for less than 25% of
mailboxes worldwide, it is estimated that business-related email accounts for the majority of
worldwide email traffic, with over 100 billion business emails sent per day (Radicati, 2014).
Increased Accessibility in the Era of Mobile Devices
Accessibility to email has become even greater due to the advent of mobile devices and
specifically smartphones (Yun et al., 2012). White and Mills (2012) have defined a smartphone
“as a cellular phone that contains many functions of a personal computer such as the use of an
operating system, Internet connectivity and an increased capacity for data storage when
compared with a traditional mobile phone” (p. 2). According to the Pew Research Center
(2014), over 58% of Americans own smartphones. Chen (2012) has contended that smartphone
use is on the rise globally and estimated that by the year 2016, over 350 million workers around
the world will use them. The practice of smartphone usage is remarkable not only because of its
prevalence, but also because of its seemingly habit-forming nature (Schumpeter, 2012). Pitichat
(2013) characterized that habit-forming nature by stating that smartphone users are rarely out of
arm's reach from their devices. Gibbs (2012) described this habit-forming nature by highlighting
a survey of 4,700 smartphone users from the United States, the United Kingdom, Brazil, China,
India, and South Korea. A quarter of respondents acknowledged checking their phones once
every 30 minutes (Gibbs, 2012). Smith (2012) cited similar findings in his study of 2,254 adult
smartphone users in the United States, 67% of whom concede that they check their phones for
messages even when they did not hear them ring or feel them vibrate.

The phenomenon of ubiquitous smartphone use has unique implications for business
users. According to Turkle (2011), smartphones enable workers to access and share information
more proficiently because smartphones have the same range of operations as laptops or desktop
computers but are handheld. The mobile nature of the smartphone heightens the ability to send
and receive communication at any time of the day or night and in virtually any location (Yun et
al., 2012). Therefore, the workday of previous generations that was typified by phone calls, in-
person interactions, and defined start and end times, is in an erosive state (Wajcman & Rose,
2011). Contemporary office workers face increasing demands on their time and attention due to
the proliferation of information and communication technologies, including smartphones and
email applications (Schaufenbuel, 2014; Wajman & Rose, 2011). MacDonald (2014) argued that
these technological advances have allowed workers to conduct business virtually anywhere and
at any time, fostering the concept of constant connectivity. This concept is central to the
relationship between email and stress.
Constant Connectivity
Connectivity in the context of technology is characterized by the ability of a user to
connect with other users through information and communication devices and platforms
(Mazmanian, 2013). Constant connectivity speaks to the seemingly ceaseless nature of those
connections (Wajcman & Rose, 2011). The concept of availability underpins the larger concept
of constant connectivity. Mazmanian and Erickson (2014) defined availability as a
“sociotechnical state of being constantly connected and accessible to others” (p. 1). This
definition highlights the intersection between technology and human behavior within the concept
of constant connectivity. That intersection is understood when considering that technological

offerings in the forms of smartphones, tablets, and laptops have enabled users to communicate
with one another. However, human behavior in the form of constantly checking devices drives
the phenomenon of constant connectivity (Wilson, 2014).
Incongruent Findings Around How Constant Connectivity Impacts Employees
Constant connectivity and therefore availability was explored by Manzanian (2013) in a
three-year ethnographic study of employees within a mid-sized apparel company. The study was
conducted shortly after the advent of the BlackBerry, and sought to understand the basis for why
some groups of employees were subject to the phenomenon that is constant connectivity,
whereas other groups utilized BlackBerry only when necessary, but not constantly. In seeking to
understand what drives constant connectivity, Mazmanian (2013) uncovered two incongruent
themes from employee viewpoints regarding the value, or lack thereof, that it provided for them.
One prevailing viewpoint that Mazmanian (2013) uncovered was that mobile technology, for one
of the two groups of employees, was believed to allow those employees to work more
proficiently and more flexibly. This viewpoint entailed the belief that users could control when
and how often to check email and connect with colleagues and clients via BlackBerry
(Mazmanian, 2013). From this perspective, the users within this group considered their
BlackBerrys as devices that could help them to work more efficiently, but not constantly
(Mazmanian, 2013). The second group of employees that Mazmanian (2013) researched viewed
their BlackBerrys from a different perspective. This group described feelings of frustration with
being contacted by colleagues and clients in the evenings and on weekends, fearing they were
missing out on their family and social activities because they were tethered to their devices by
carrying their BlackBerrys with them at all times (Mazmanian, 2013).

The two themes that Mazmanian (2013) described are shaped by two different narratives
and serve to elucidate the complex nature of constant connectivity. That complex nature was
further explored by Mazmanian et al. (2013) who described these seemingly antithetical
characteristics as autonomy paradox (p. 1337). The concept of autonomy paradox is one that
speaks directly to the duality of mobile email. Mobile email’s utility is that it offers flexibility to
work from anywhere and at any time. However, it can pose problematic for employees in that
can also escalate expectations regarding availability (Mazmanian et al., 2013). Therefore, the
state of being constantly connected has varied implications for employee populations, as there is
no one consistent narrative that summarizes its impact. Admittedly, because there are varied
impacts of constant connectivity, some may argue that it would be difficult to identify solutions
to solving it. However, given that there are employee populations who are impacted negatively
vis-à-vis stress, it serves as a complex problem that is deserving of consideration. That
consideration necessitates a better understanding of what drives constant connectivity.
Understanding What Drives Constant Connectivity
There are numerous schools of thought which seek to explain why constant connectivity
exists. Those schools of thought include economic logic, individual motivation rationale, and
reasoning drawn from normative organizational behavior. Mazmanian and Erickson (2014)
argued that economic logic explains why constant connectivity exists. Mazmanian and Erickson
(2014) made this argument based on their ethnographic study of over 200 professionals from a
wide variety of fields including banking, sales, and hospitality. Mazmanian and Erickson (2014)
argued that constant connectivity, and thus, availability, has become an offering within the
marketplace. Specifically, access to employees via technological offerings, including email, is

marketed to customers in the same fashion of traditional goods and services (Mazmanian &
Erickson, 2014). According to Mazmanian and Erickson (2014), the demands of the market
have served as a fundamental force in fostering the concept of constant connectivity.
Kolb et al. (2012) took a different approach to understanding what drives constant
connectivity with their argument that actor agency is a factor. Actor agency refers to the ability
of users to make their decisions regarding the connection activities (Kolb et al., 2012). This
argument focuses on the role of individual choices over market forces. Porter and Kakabadse
(2006) also examined individual action in the context of constant connectivity, but with a focus
on addiction and, specifically, workaholism as factors. In this scenario, the addictions of those
with workaholic tendencies are enabled by the proliferation of ICTs. Both of the previous
arguments that focus on the individual as the primary driver of constant connectivity are valid
but do not incorporate the role of organizational norms in the context of constant connectivity.
In yet another vein, Barber and Santuzzi (2014) illustrated the role that social influences
and specifically, organizational norms, play in encouraging constant connectivity within
employee populations. Feldman (1984) defined norms as the “informal rules that groups adopt
to regulate and regularize group members’ behavior” (p. 47). Barber and Santuzzi (2014)
denoted the pressure that employees experience in attempting to conform to the normative email
behavior in their study of telepressure. The concept of telepressure is linked to the idea that
normative group behavior can influence individual email behavior by placing social pressure on
employees to adopt the email norms of the organization (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). The
theoretical construct of telepressure will be expanded upon in the second chapter of this
Capstone.

The arguments of economic underpinning, individual motivation, and normative
organizational behavior each have merit in that they delineate logical reasoning to explain why
constant connectivity exists. The argument regarding organizational norms as drivers of email
behavior is especially salient given the research of Turner et al. (2006). Turner et al. (2006)
contended that the communication behavior that exists at the organizational level could influence
individual members’ behavior. Further, when members of an organization adopt and adhere to
the communication norms of the organization, they are rewarded (Turner et al., 2006). Based on
their results, Turner et al. (2006) concluded that higher rates of email usage were perceived to be
indicative of better performance (Turner et al., 2006). This study underpins the argument that
organizational norms not only drive email behavior, but that email behavior is a dimension that is
perceived to indicate an employee’s level of performance. For that reason, an organization’s
email norms are central to understanding how email can create stress within employee
populations.
How Email Norms Inform Email Practices
As stated in the introduction of this Capstone, organizational norms regarding email
behavior can cause stress for employees, leading to health outcomes at an individual level and
productivity implications at an organizational level. Email norms can cause stress because they
are linked to perceptions of performance and reputation (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014; Turner et al.,
2006). If employees are invested in their jobs and the organizations, employees will conform to
the normative email behavior of the organization in order to be perceived well by their
colleagues and clients (Turner et al., 2006). Barber and Santuzzi (2014) suggested that
employees will conform to email norms even when such norms lead to stress because of the

social need of the individual to be manage others’ impressions of them. Stress-causing email
norms manifest in a variety of practices. One such practice takes the form of apologizing
(Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Apologizing for perceived inadequacies regarding email behavior,
specifically around response times, reinforces the dominant organizational norms by suggesting
that there is a breach of those norms that requires forgiveness (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). The
recipient’s apologizing suggests to the sender that the recipient has done something wrong by not
responding quickly enough. This causes stress for employees because it engenders a sense that
responses must happen as soon as possible, and the faster the response, the better (Barber &
Santuzzi, 2014).
An additional norm that can give rise to stress is the practice of email escalation. Email
escalation is a norm that is also formed around response times. In the practice of email
escalation, senders can call attention to recipients’ perceived inadequate response times by
copying other recipients, often the original recipient’s supervisor (Turner et al., 2006). By
escalating an email to an employee’s supervisor, the recipient can be perceived as inefficient or
unresponsive (Turner et al., 2006). Thus, employees are concerned about their response times
and feel the need to respond to as many messages as possible, as quickly as possible, leading to
stress (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). A third norm that can give rise to stress is the seemingly
appropriate practice of sending emails at any time of the day or night. In Mazmanian’s (2013)
ethnographic study described in the preceding section, recipients reported receiving emails in the
evenings and weekends. This scenario generates stress as employees feel they must stay
connected to their email to avoid a backlog of unanswered emails from when they are not
connected (Barley, et al., 2011). Whittaker and Sidner (1996) contend that a backlog of emails
within a user’s inbox is problematic for employees because it can entail lost information and

reduced response times. Therefore, the norm of emailing colleagues and customers during non-
working hours creates stress because it represents a long task list upon the user’s return to email.
In order to avoid this backlog, users stay connected on evenings and weekends, taking away their
personal time (Deal, 2013). Given the focus on response times that the preceding norms
describe, it is appropriate to explore the nature of responsiveness in the context of email through
the lenses of synchronous versus asynchronous communication.
Synchronous and Asynchronous Communication
While synchronous communication occurs in real time, asynchronous communication
does not (Sotillo, 2000). In synchronous communication, such as a telephone conversation, users
are expected to reply to communication immediately. For example, if there are two parties on a
call and one asks the other a question, the receiver of the question is expected to reply
immediately (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Email is one example of asynchronous communication
in that the recipient may not read an email at the exact moment that it comes into a user’s inbox
(Sotillo, 2000). Further, even if the recipient does read an email at the time that it comes into his
or her mailbox, the recipient has the choice to not respond immediately. Although email
communication is asynchronous, users often respond to email in the same manner in which they
would respond to synchronous communication (Tugent, 2012; Barber & Santuzzi, 2014).
Organizational norms are increasingly dictating that socially acceptable response times to emails
are becoming shorter as the use of smartphones and access to wireless networks increases among
employees (Park, Fritz, & Jex, 2011). Therefore, even though email is intended as an
asynchronous form of communication, it is increasingly seen as synchronous, compelling
employees to respond to messages as soon as possible (Park, et al., 2011).

How Email Practices Can Lead to Stress
As stated in the Results section of this Capstone, the linkage between email and stress
was explored by Kushlev and Dunn (2014) who found a positive correlational relationship
between increased email checking and higher self-reported levels of stress. There are two
arguments that describe how email practices can lead to stress. The first argument entails email
overload as a cause of stress (Barley et al, 2011). Email overload takes place when employees
feel as if email is actually creating more work for them because they must handle an increased
number of requests via email (Barley et al., 2011). The second argument entails work-life
conflict related to email practices as a cause of stress (Barley et al., 2011). This argument entails
work-related activities causing stress for employees because they seep into the employee’s
personal life (Barley et al., 2011). While there is some overlap between arguments, they
distinctly describe two different reasons why email can cause stress. Namely, email overload
speaks to email’s capacity to generate more work for employees, whereas work-life conflict
related to email speaks to the problem of email blurring the lines between home and work
(Barley et al., 2011). The concept of email overload can be understood by examining the theory
of techno-overload (Tarafdar et al., 2007), and the concept of work-life conflict as it relates to
email behavior can be understood by examining the theory of techno-invasion (Tarafdar et al.,
2007). These concepts, which serve as the theoretical underpinnings for email overload and
work life conflict due to email, were introduced in the Literature Review and will be further
explored in the second chapter of this Capstone. Because email overload and work life conflict
generate work-related stress, it is important to explore the concept of work-related stress.

Work-Related Stress
Work-related stress is a well-researched topic that draws upon the larger concept of stress
(Babatunde, 2013). Seyle (1976) introduced two forms of stress: eustress and distress. Eustress
serves as a motivational force in that it can evoke feelings of satisfaction that result from being
challenged in the effort to accomplish a task or goal (Bhagat et al., 2012). Distress is commonly
used interchangeably with the generalized term “stress” and denotes the unhealthy responses that
can occur when an individual is presented with a scenario where he or she feels taxed or
threatened and does not have the capacity to manage effectively (Bhagat et al., 2012).
Cartwright and Cooper (1997) theorized that stress manifests both physically and mentally and is
a human condition that has existed for thousands of years. Stress served as a survival technique
for early humans because it signaled a dangerous and potentially harmful situation (Cartwright &
Cooper, 1997). Stress is a reaction within the body and remains a condition within humans today
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1997). Stress reactions occur within the body when the pituitary and
adrenal glands release hormones, causing an increase of adrenaline and corticosteroid into the
bloodstream, impacting several systems in the body including the brain, heart, and nerves
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1997). Work-related stress pertains to the realm of employment and is
defined as “the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of
the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of the worker” (NIOSH, 1999). As
described in the two preceding sections of this Capstone, email can create stress for employees
because it represents a task list that is never complete, blurs the boundaries between home and
work, and is a constant force in employees’ lives, regardless of time or location (Barber &
Santuzzi, 2014; Mazmanian, 2013; Kushlev & Dunn, 2014; Yun et al., 2012). Salleh (2008)
argued that not all stress results in poor health outcomes, but prolonged exposure to stress can do

so because it erodes the strength of the immune system, resulting in increased levels of illness.
Further, mental stress can generate physical responses (Salleh, 2008). Therefore, negative health
outcomes associated with stress can impact an individual’s well-being. Those health outcomes
are described in the following section.
Health Outcomes of Stress
As stated in the previous section of this Capstone, overexposure to email can create stress
for employees. Stress is problematic for employees at an individual level because it can create
negative health outcomes (Salleh, 2008). Cohen et al. (2012) explored that relationship in a
medical study of 276 adults and concluded that the linkage between prolonged stress and reduced
health is explained by increased levels of glucocorticoid receptor resistance that occurs from
stress, which diminishes the body’s ability to fight off disease. Physically, health outcomes are
numerous and can include obesity (Bose, Olivan & Laferrere, 2010), ulcers (Salleh, 2008), and
cardiovascular disease (Cartwright & Cooper, 1997). From a mental health perspective, those
health outcomes include anger, nervousness, and depression (APA, 2010). The health outcomes
mentioned above do not represent an exhaustive list of the health consequences of prolonged
stress, but they do serve to elucidate the health implications that can arise from prolonged stress.
These health outcomes are problematic for employees at an individual level because they
threaten the quality of life. At an organizational level, these health outcomes are manifested in
the forms of presenteeism, absenteeism, and ultimately, profit loss (Stewart et al., 2003). These
outcomes are explored in the next section of this Capstone.

Productivity Implications of Stress
The link between normative behavior and email practices was drawn out in a previous
section of this Capstone by highlighting the concept of constant connectivity. Following that
linkage, this Capstone sought to make the connection between overexposure to email via
normative behavior and work-related stress by exploring the research of Kushlev and Dunn
(2014). This Capstone then sought to make the link between work-related stress and health
outcomes by drawing upon the research of Cohen et al. (2012). In this section, this Capstone
seeks to draw out the relationship between health and productivity. This relationship can be
understood in the argument of Cole and Neumayer (2005) who contended that productivity could
diminish when employees are too ill to work. Conner (2013) echoed that sentiment with her
argument that organizational productivity is negatively impacted when employees are exhausted.
Poor health outcomes can be manifested into reduced productivity because of practices
such as absenteeism. Sarda (2015) contended that absenteeism could result from stress when an
employee seeks to avoid the stress-inducing aspects of his or her job. Additionally, when stress
manifests in illness, employees may be too ill to attend work, resulting in lost productivity.
Cooper and Dewey (2008) illustrated the linkage between illness and productivity by arguing
that there are an average of 175 million working days lost in Britain each year due to illness and
in 2006, British companies lost £20.2 billion as a result of illness-related absenteeism.
Presenteeism is also a by-product of poor health (Cooper & Dewey, 2008). Cooper and Dewey
(2008) characterized presenteeism as productivity loss that occurs as a by-product of employees
who perform work even when they are ill. In this scenario, employees who perform work when
they are ill cause productivity loss because their work products are sub-par (Cooper & Dewey,
2008). Hemp (2004) noted that presenteeism is not as easily observed or measured as

absenteeism, but it does create productivity loss. Stewart et al. (2003) put forth that the health-
related costs from factors including presenteeism and absenteeism are calculated to $228.5
billion in the United States alone. Therefore, productivity loss is a substantial problem that
results from poor health.
Chapter One Conclusion
The phenomenon that is constant connectivity is problematic for employees because it
can lead to stress and poor health (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). These individual outcomes
accumulate and negatively impact organizational productivity for reasons that include
absenteeism and presenteeism (Cooper & Dewey, 2008). Scholars (Mazmanian & Erickson,
2014; Kolb et al., 2012; Barber & Santuzzi, 2014) have taken varying approaches to
understanding the foundational basis of constant connectivity. This Capstone posits that Barber
and Santuzzi’s (2014) argument regarding organizational norms as a cause of constant
connectivity is especially relevant given the research of Turner et al. (2006). Therefore, in order
to address constant connectivity, it is essential to address the organizational norms that foster it.
In order to gain clarity around the intersection of norms, constant connectivity, and their
resulting implications, it is also important to understand their theoretical underpinnings. The
second chapter of this Capstone provides an analysis of the theories that clarify how and why the
practical problems described in this chapter exist.

Chapter Two: Theoretical Underpinnings of Norms, Constant Connectivity, and Stress
Chapter One provided the historical background in order to contextualize the
phenomenon that is constant connectivity. It further elucidated several arguments regarding why
constant connectivity exists. Additionally, Chapter One put forth the argument that
organizational norms drive the practice of constant connectivity and those norms are reinforced
through email practices including apologizing and email escalation (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014;
Turner et al., 2006). These norms give rise to stress because they create the expectation that
employees should treat email as if it were a synchronous form of communication, when, in fact,
it is asynchronous. Further, employees’ extended exposure to constant email activity results in
higher levels of stress (Kushlev & Dunn, 2014; Mark et al., 2012). At an individual level, stress
has health outcomes that range from anger to cardiovascular disease (APA, 2010; Cartwright &
Cooper, 1997). Negative health outcomes have productivity consequences at an organizational
level because they can cause absenteeism or presenteeism (Stewart et al., 2003). Given the
linkage between constant connectivity and reduced productivity, it can be argued that in order to
assuage productivity loss as a by-product of constant connectivity, organizations should address
the phenomenon of constant connectivity. In order to do so effectively, organizations should
look to what is driving constant connectivity: organizational norms.
This chapter provides insight into the theoretical underpinnings of how organizational
norms, pressure, and stress intersect in the context of email behavior. This chapter brings forth
the argument that employees feel the pressure to remain constantly connected in order for their
peers and colleagues to perceive them well (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Further, employees
amplify their pressure to be perceived well through a concept called the cycle of responsiveness
(Perlow, 2012). What results from the cycle of responsiveness is techno-stress, a unique type of

stress that takes place in response to technology. In order to combat the stress-related outcomes
of constant connectivity, organizations must first address the organizational norms that enable
that practice. It is important to understand the theories behind the behaviors in order to craft
solutions to the problem of constant connectivity.
Why Employees Adopt Behaviors
The first chapter of this Capstone posited that norms around email use drive constant
connectivity because individual email behavior is often viewed congruently with overall
performance (Turner et al., 2006). Those employees who conform to organizational norms of
being constantly connected and therefore available are viewed as more effective as those who do
not conform (Turner et al., 2006). Therefore, it follows that employees who wish to be viewed
as effective conform to normative email behavior in order to gain approval. Turner et al. (2006)
applied social influence theory to hypothesize that strong perceived organizational norms around
email use result in higher email usage rates among employees, allowing for the theoretical
understanding of how organizational norms influence individual behavior.
One theory of social influence was studied by Kelman (1958) who argued that individual
behavior is influenced through at least one of three processes. The first process consists of
compliance (Kelman, 1958). In this process, individuals adopt specific behaviors in order to
gain rewards or avoid punishment (Kelman, 1958). The process of compliance as it pertains to
email use is demonstrated by Turner et al. (2006) where they argue that employees who adopt
normative email behavior are rewarded with higher performance approval ratings. In contrast to
the process of compliance, Kelman (1958) introduced the process of internalization. The process
of internalization is one that takes place because the individual finds value in a specific behavior

(Kelman, 1958). In this process, the individual gives credence to the behavior because it aligns
with his or her views (Kelman, 1958). The process of internalization provides the theoretical
basis for understanding Mazmanian et al. (2013) concept of the autonomy paradox. As
described in Chapter One, Mazmanian et al. (2013) introduced the concept of the autonomy
paradox to describe the seemingly incongruous nature of mobile email. In one viewpoint, users
of mobile email adopt to the normative email behavior of the group because they see the utility
of being able to access email at any time and in any location (Mazmanian et al., 2013).
Contrasting that viewpoint, is one that suggests that email tethers employees to their devices
resulting in frustration (Mazmanian et al., 2013). The process of internalization speaks directly
to the former viewpoint in that users adopt the behavior because they see the value in doing so.
Kelman (1958) theorized that the process of identification was different from that of
internalization because of its focus on relationship building. During identification, the individual
adopts a behavior because of its connection to the coveted relationship (Kelman, 1958).
Important to note is that relationships in this context are defined by other individuals or by the
group as a whole (Kelman, 1958). In examining identification through the lens of email
behavior, this process is one that is reflected within the concept of telepressure (Barber &
Santuzzi, 2014). Telepressure is a concept that overlaps with Kelman’s (1958) process of
identification in that both focus on relationship building as the root of adopting behavior.
Telepressure is distinct from identification, however, because it speaks directly to how
individuals adopt normative email behavior in order to build social relationships. The next
section of this paper will provide a greater description of telepressure and how it is linked to
constant connectivity.

Telepressure
As stated in the previous section, telepressure is a construct that is built around
employees’ desires to build or maintain relationships at work through adhering to normative
email behavior. Telepressure is similar to peer pressure that occurs in adolescents insofar that it
is characterized by the need of the individual to fit in within the larger group (Barber & Santuzzi,
2014). Further, telepressure entails impression management, which takes place when employees
work to cultivate the perception that they are effective by being available and responsive to email
messages (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). The norms around responsiveness and availability and the
overwhelming desire to adopt those norms in order to build relationships and be accepted by the
dominant group are a key ingredient in the factors that give rise to the concept of constant
connectivity. Constant connectivity, as described in Chapter One, is linked to job stress.
Therefore, the theoretical concept of telepressure is one that engenders stress because it fosters
employees’ desires to be constantly connected in order to build relationships and manage their
reputations (Barber & Santuzzi, 2014). Telepressure is problematic in and of itself because it
creates the need to be constantly connected even when that constant connection gives rise to
stress. The theoretical background to understand how telepressure becomes amplified is
described by the concept known as the cycle of responsiveness, which is explored in the next
section.
Cycle of Responsiveness
In the previous sections, the theories of social influence and telepressure were described
in order to explain the theoretical foundations behind the practical problem of constant
connectivity. This section will provide an account of how telepressure is amplified. This

account is summarized by Perlow’s (2012) concept called the cycle of responsiveness. Perlow
(2012) introduced the cycle of responsiveness to depict the amplification of pressure to be
constantly connected that is borne out of individual action. According to Perlow (2012), the
cycle’s genesis is rooted in a legitimate business request. This request might come in the form of
an email from a colleague in a different time zone that requests a specific piece of information,
for example. The receiver of the email would then respond in order to be viewed as responsive,
and thus, effective (Perlow, 2012). The next component of the cycle is shaped by the receiver
altering his or her schedule in order to be able to respond (Perlow, 2012). This component of the
cycle entails the receiver giving precedence to email communication over other activities in his
or her life. In the next component of the cycle, the frequency of communication increases
(Perlow, 2012). This takes place because the receiver wishes to be perceived as responsive and
alters his or schedule accordingly, fostering colleagues’ and clients’ beliefs that it is acceptable
to make requests because they know that the receiver will respond (Perlow, 2012). In this
component of the cycle, the receiver considers all requests, whether urgent or not, worthy of
immediate attention because he or she wishes to continue the perception that he or she is
responsive (Perlow, 2012). The desire to be perceived as responsive gives rise to the next
component of the cycle, which is the culture of responsiveness whereby employees become so
consumed with being perceived as responsive that “even if they begin resenting how much work
is spilling into their personal lives, they fail to recognize that they are their worst enemy, the
source of much of the pressure that they attribute to the nature of their business” (Perlow, 2012,
p. 8). This quote suggests that employees play a role in their own amplification of pressure to
stay connected (Perlow, 2012). Perlow’s (2012) argument that employees amplify their own
state of constant connectivity is understood in the context of the cycle of responsiveness. In that

cycle, employees are initially connected because of a legitimate need, but stay connected because
of their desire to be perceived as responsive. Therefore, they amplify their pressure because they
seek approval of their colleagues and clients.
The desire to be perceived as responsive, and thus effective, within the cycle of
responsiveness speaks directly to Barber and Santuzzi’s (2014) concept of telepressure, in that
employees perceive their email behavior as linked to their reputation. As described in Chapter
One, stress results as a product of constant connectivity from email norms, resulting in poor
health outcomes at an individual level and reduced productivity at an organizational level.
Therefore, the cycle of responsiveness may be partially culpable for job stress. Given that stress
is the outcome associated with constant connectivity driven by email norms, it is necessary to
explore the theoretical foundation of stress as it relates to email.
Technostress
The previous sections of this Capstone that postulated the theoretical foundations that
demonstrate why individuals adopt normative behaviors of groups can be found in Kelman’s
(1958) process of identification. Further, the concept of telepressure is similar to the process of
identification in that both entail individuals adopting behavior in an attempt to build
relationships. Telepressure is unique in that it can support an understanding of constant
connectivity because it speaks directly to the processes of building relationships and maintaining
one’s reputation through availability and responsiveness to email communication (Barber &
Santuzzi, 2014). The concept known as the cycle of responsiveness amplifies telepressure.
Given that stress is the outcome of this behavior, it is important to take a closer examination
from a theoretical standpoint.

The concept of stress was detailed in Chapter One by explaining both what it is and how
the human body reacts to it. This section of the Capstone elucidates the specific role that
technology plays in generating stress by examining the concept of technostress, which was
introduced by Brod (1984). As described in the Literature Review, Brod (1984) hypothesized
that technostress was a unique type of stress that took shape when an individual was unable to
manage computer technologies in a healthy fashion. Additionally, technotress can be further
explored by the two different ways in which it manifests. The first manifestation of technostress
takes place when individuals reject technological advances, whereas the second manifestation
takes place when individuals overidentify with technology (Brod, 1984). The focus of this
section is the manifestation of technostress that takes place when individuals overly identify with
technology, and in this case, the technological offering that is email.
According to Brod’s (1984) theory that technostress takes place when individuals overly
identify with technology, the occurrence of employees overly identifying with technology proves
problematic and stress inducing because employees are expected to work at the pace of
technology. The rationale for believing that employees can work at the pace of technology is
derived from their over-identification with it (Brod, 1984). As a result, deadlines for completion
are expected sooner, resulting in stress outcomes, both physically and mentally (Brod, 1984).
Brod’s (1984) argument that technology has increased the pace at which employees are expected
to work speaks broadly to the overarching phenomenon that is technology related stress. When
narrowed down to the application of email specifically, the argument that technostress results
from increased pace holds true when considering shifting views regarding acceptable response
times as described in Chapter One. Therefore, the concept of technostress serves as the
theoretical foundation for email-related stress. The broad and overarching concept of

technostress has sub-concepts that provide a more detailed theoretical basis of email overload
and work-life conflict because of constant connectivity. The theoretical basis for email overload
is summarized by the concept of techno-overload (Tarafdar et al., 2007). Similarly, the
theoretical basis for work-life conflict as a product of constant connectivity is called techno-
invasion (Tarafdar et al., 2007).
Techno-Overload
Tarafdar et al. (2007) introduced the concept of techno-overload to “describe situations
where ICTs force users to work faster and longer” (p. 315). Technology’s impact on employees’
perception that they must work faster speaks directly to Brod’s (1984) argument that employees’
over-identification with technology results in the perception that human beings must be able to
work at the same pace of technology. This broad view of technology driving the need to work
more quickly and for longer periods can be aptly described in the context of email, particularly
email overload. Email overload proves problematic for employees because it interrupts
workflow can cause the workday to be extended (Barley et al., 2011).
In their study of how overload exists in the context of email, Barley et al. (2011)
contended that users develop the perception that email creates the need to work longer for
several reasons. The first reason is because it creates additional work due to its ease at which
tasks are pushed onto employees (Barley et al., 2011). In this scenario, employees are compelled
to address an onslaught emails which represent tasks to accomplish, thus driving the need to
work longer in order to finish those tasks (Barley et al., 2011). The second reason that email
overload causes stress is it interrupts employees when trying to accomplish other tasks
(Whittaker & Sidner, 1996). Mark, Gonzalez and Harris (2005) described this phenomenon as
work fragmentation. Work fragmentation can be beneficial to a certain extent in that it provides

an opportunity for employees to refresh ideas by forcing employees to move from one task to
another (Mark et al., 2005). However, excessive interruptions are problematic because they
necessitate the expenditure of time in order to restart the original task and become reoriented
with the objectives of that task (Mark et al., 2005). Thus, the increased expenditure of time it
takes to resume tasks results in lengthening of the workday. Email overload also causes
employees to work faster because of the perceived connection between responsiveness and
reputation. According to Sotillo (2000), the nature of asynchronous communication, such as
email, is not characterized by an instantaneousness nature. Rather, the nature of asynchronous
communication provides the recipient of the message flexibility when determining when to
respond. However, practices such as apologizing for not responding quickly enough, as well as
email escalation embody the increasingly salient viewpoint that email communication
necessitates an immediate response regardless of other priorities, resulting in stress for
employees. Whereas techno-overload speaks broadly to the stress-related outcome with being
overloaded by email, techno-invasion is characterized by technology’s ability to blur the lines
between work and life (Tarafdar et al. 2007).
Techno-Invasion
The concept of techno-invasion aligns directly with the work-life conflict associated with
constant connectivity. Tarafdar et al. (2007) coined the term techno-invasion to describe
“situations where professionals can potentially be reached anywhere at any time and feel the
need to be constantly connected” (p. 116). Techno-invasion results when work-related tasks
bleed into the personal time of employees, such as vacations, in the evenings, or even when an
employee is home on sick leave. The concept of techno-invasion entails the invasion of
employees’ personal lives by their work lives because they are tethered to their devices (Tarafdar

et al., 2007). Morgan (2003) stated that such conditions represent decreasing respect for
employees’ personal lives. Techno-invasion results in work-life imbalance because even when
employees are not physically at work, they feel as if they can never escape it (Matta, 2015).
Being able to have time away from work is necessary in order to foster employee well-being
(Meijman & Mulder, 1998). The effort recovery model illuminates why time outside of work is
essential to employee well-being.
The Effort Recovery Model
Meijman and Mulder (1998) introduced the effort recovery model in order to explain the
reasons employees need time away from work in order to maximize well-being. This model is
built upon the assumption that when confronted with a workload, employees respond
physiologically or behaviorally (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). The responses that employees
provide represent effort and the exertion of effort is essential in order for that employee to
complete the task (Meijman & Mulder, 1998). That effort represents a departure from a baseline
physiological or behavioral state. During the period of effort expenditure, the sympathetic-
adrenal-medullary system regulates cardiovascular activity (Demerouti, Bakker, Geurts, & Taris,
2009). If the employee is engaged in highly stressful activities, the body may also regulate
through the release of cortisol (Demerouti et al., 2009). In scenarios where employees have
ample time from one period of effort to another, the body returns to its pre-stress level and health
is not at risk of being jeopardized (Demerouti et al., 2009). According to Sonnentag (2001), an
employee whose job requires significant cognitive demands, for example, should engage in non-
work activities that do not require significant cognitive strain in order to facilitate the process of
recovery.

KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL

KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (18)

Similaire à KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL

Similaire à KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL (20)

KATHRYN PATEL CAPSTONE SPRING 2015 FINAL