The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0144-333X.htm

The influence of the COVID-19 Influence of the

COVID-19
pandemic on the digital pandemic

transformation of work
Lisa Nagel
University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
Received 27 July 2020
Revised 8 August 2020
Abstract Accepted 9 August 2020
Purpose – This study investigates whether the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an acceleration of the digital
transformation in the workplace.
Design/methodology/approach – This study is based on a survey conducted during the COVID-19
pandemic from March to April 2020 on the crowdsourcing platform Amazon Mechanical Turk.
Findings – The findings show an increase of people working from home offices and that many people believe
that digital transformation of work has accelerated in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. People who noted
this acceleration can imagine working digitally exclusively in the future. Moreover, the importance of
traditional jobs as a secure source of income has decreased, and digital forms of work as a secure source of
income have increased because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Workers believe that digital work will play a more
important role as a secure source of income in the future than traditional jobs.
Research limitations/implications – Because the survey was conducted online, respondents may have had
a certain affinity for digital work.
Originality/value – This study assesses the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the future of work,
showing that changes in the perception of digital transformation and the willingness to work exclusively in a
digital manner have arisen as result of the COVID-19 pandemic. To estimate the long-term consequences of the
pandemic on the digitisation of work, research that includes macroeconomic consequences in its forecast is
necessary.
Keywords COVID-19, Digital transformation, Future of work, Income security
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic took the world by surprise in early 2020, and the economy has
continued to face a substantial downturn, which has implications for working situations
(Adams-Prassl et al., 2020; B
eland et al., 2020; Bick and Blandin, 2020; Coibion et al., 2020). The
world has faced several global economic crises in recent decades, but the current crisis has
affected the introduction of digital technologies in all areas of human activity more
profoundly than any before (Shkalenko and Fadeeva, 2020). Voluntary precautions against
COVID-19, as well as mandatory government restrictions, have forced companies to
increasingly offer employees the option of working at home, and thus a large number of
people exclusively working from home have integrated existing technologies into their daily
work routines (B
eland et al., 2020; Spurk and Straub, 2020; St€ urz et al., 2020).
Although no one can foresee how the rapid change to digital work will affect the work
situation and spread of digital work forms in the future, the use of digital technologies has
clearly increased, at least temporarily, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the
question arises: Has the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital transformation?

The author would like to thank Mona Schw€orer for her comments and Lars Hornuf. The author
acknowledges the Amazon Mechanical Turk workers who completed the surveys. The author also thanks
the editors of the journal as well as the reviewers, who have given up valuable time during the COVID-19
crisis.
International Journal of Sociology
This article evolved as part of the research project “Crowdsourcing as a new form of organizing labor and Social Policy
relations: regulatory requirements and welfare effects” and was financially supported by the German © Emerald Publishing Limited
0144-333X
Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) under grant HO 5296/3-1. DOI 10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0323
IJSSP 2. Theory: the COVID-19 pandemic and the digital transformation of work
For several years now, the political, economic and societal realms have been involved in the
process of digital transformation. In 2017, the European Commission noted that the debate on
the impact of digital transformation on the economy and society has become considerably more
important in recent years. The term digital transformation of labour describes the digitisation
of work previously carried out by individuals in the enterprise (Eberhard et al., 2017). This leads
to digital work, which includes the use of new technologies and the possibility of working
remotely from the employer. Thereby individuals can perform their work in a variety of
locations using new professional skill (Wilks and Billsberry, 2007; Sullivan, 2003). Digital
transformation is considered to help turn the challenge of the COVID-19 crisis into an
opportunity. To ensure an effective response to the COVID-19 crisis, the European Commission
estimates that, in 2020–2021, at least V1.5 trillion must be invested in green and digital
transformation (European Union, 2020). Thus, digital transformation is one of the key sectors of
Europe’s future. Many elements of technological change are created at the workplace, which
leads to a general social acceleration (Rosa, 2014).
Organisations expect digital transformation to increase productivity and efficiency, which
should give them a competitive advantage over other market respondents (Vial, 2019). To
achieve this goal, organisations are encouraging their employees to work in new ways, using
technology while taking on more autonomy. Digital transformation leads to a work
transformation, which involves a reorganisation of work and ultimately changes the way
people work (Anderson-Connolly et al., 2002). In this context, the acceptance of new technology
as part of the daily routine is essential (Momani and Jamous, 2017). Technology acceptance is
considered one of the main success factors of new technologies (e.g. Molino et al., 2020; Scherer
et al., 2019; Taherdoost, 2018; Venkatesh et al., 2003). Acceptance and implementation of new
behaviour due to new technologies can take a long time under normal circumstances (e.g.
Baturay et al., 2017; Gelbrich and Sattler, 2014). Many organisations have had to adapt to make
technologies part of their everyday work routines. However, COVID-19 caused this adaptation
to be implemented faster than under normal circumstances. It is conceivable that people who
would not otherwise have been so quick to integrate technologies in new ways (e.g. technology
in the home office) into their daily work routine were forced to adapt more rapidly. Firms often
respond to crises by making short-term adjustments and organisational changes, using these
strategies to actively deal with environmental changes in the most effective possible way. This
change in organisations often occurs when financial matters are central to the survival and
competitiveness of the organisation (Men
endez and Castro, 2002). Therefore, firms and workers
will aim to be more flexible to deal with a possible shock in the future (Brakman et al., 2020). In
the current situation, this flexibility could extend to digital forms of work.
Because personal contact with other individuals correlates with the probability of
contracting COVID-19, a regular working day is no longer possible for many employees
(B
eland et al., 2020). Voluntary precautions against COVID-19, as well as mandatory
government restrictions, have forced companies to increase offers to work at home, which has
increased remote work substantially (B
eland et al., 2020; Spurk and Straub, 2020; St€ urz et al.,
2020). This increase has made clear that a large part of working from home requires
integrating existing technologies into daily work routines. In turn, the lockdown has created
greater awareness that working from a distance, using the existing technologies, is possible
even for jobs traditionally carried out in the office (Brakman et al., 2020).
Many employees who work from home offices are currently organising their working
hours more flexibly, which can be viewed as adapting to the new situation. As a result, Von
Gaudecker et al. (2020) have observed a general decline in total working hours. In addition,
employees and superiors are not present in the home office, which could lead to greater
autonomy – an important predictor for job satisfaction (Finn, 2001; Fried and Ferris, 1987;
Hackman and Oldham, 1975; Naqvi et al., 2013).
 Because people working remotely have less contact with other people than professionals Influence of the
who work at their actual place of work, such as nurses or supermarket employees, and personal COVID-19
contact with other individuals correlates with the probability of contracting COVID-19, remote
workers should be at lower risk of infection. This decreased risk could lead to an impression of
pandemic
being looked out for and valued and increase feelings of security, thus leading to greater job
satisfaction (Danish and Usman, 2010; Tessema et al., 2013). It seems that companies and people
may have adapted to the new work situation more rapidly than they would have if the
pandemic had not occurred. The question arises: Has the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated
digital transformation?

3. Hypotheses and research questions

Given the current COVID-19 crisis situation, employers and employees will likely try to create
more leeway and react flexibly to new challenges (Brakman et al., 2020). Both companies and
individuals must realise that digital transformation is possible given the feasibility of the rapid
transition to digital work. But digital transformation requires workers with a digital skill set.
Employees who are already familiar with digital technologies will find it easier to use them
effectively. (Kohnke, 2017). People who have already had experience with home office may find
it easier to work in the home office over a longer period of time. In times of COVID-19, this could
lead to people with experience in digital work being more likely to switch to home office work
than others. A rise in the home office because of COVID-19 is expected (B
eland et al., 2020;
Spurk and Straub, 2020; St€ urz et al., 2020), but the question still remains:
RQ1. Have individuals who work in the home office during COVID-19 already had
previous experience with this form of work?
The increase in digital work suggests that traditional work forms are less frequently
performed during the COVID-19 pandemic. People might perceive digital work in the current
situation as a secure source of income. This could also have an impact on the perception of the
importance of digital work forms as a source of income in the future. It is also unclear which
impact the increase in home offices will have on the perception of the importance of income
from traditional jobs as a secure source of income. The questions arise:
RQ2. Do people predict that digital jobs are more likely to be a secure source of income in
the future than before and during the COVID-19 pandemic?
RQ3. Has the importance of traditional and digital jobs as a secure source of income
changed given the COVID-19 pandemic?
Given the current state of research and the changes in the work context due to the COVID-19
pandemic already described, the first hypothesis is formulated as follows:
H1. People believe that digital transformation of work will spread faster, due to their
experience with the COVID-19 pandemic.
The increase in technology use in everyday work (B
eland et al., 2020; Spurk and Straub, 2020;
St€
urz et al., 2020) and changes in working hours (Von Gaudecker, 2020) imply that employees
could be working in new ways, using technology to a greater extent and taking on more
autonomy. Moreover, people working from home have a lower risk of being infected with
COVID-19, which could lead to greater job satisfaction (Hirsh et al., 2012; Tessema et al., 2013).
These assertions lead to the second hypothesis:
H2. People working exclusively from home during the COVID-19 pandemic have greater
job satisfaction than people not working exclusively from home during the COVID-19
pandemic.
IJSSP In addition to the experience with digital work gained through the COVID-19 pandemic,
European Commission funding to promote digital change could provide a positive impact on
technological change (European Commission, 2020). This funding could also influence
workers’ predictions for the future of work, in the sense that secure sources of income might
be expected with digital work in the future. Following this logic, the last hypothesis is
formulated as follows:
H3. The more people believe in an increased spread of digital transformation due to the
COVID-19 pandemic, the more likely they are to imagine working exclusively
digitally in the future.

4. Method
4.1 Respondents
The data were collected online from March to April 2020. The study sample comprised adults
registered as “workers” on the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform. Amazon Mechanical Turk
is a crowdsourcing platform on which virtual tasks are processed that require human
intelligence. Workers on Amazon Mechanical Turk have the possibility to work on various
tasks. These tasks can be performed flexibly in terms of time and location. Respondents
resided in the United States, Italy, Spain, France, United Kingdom and Germany. The survey
was conducted in English. The total sample size was 554, including 95 respondents from the
United States, 103 from Italy, 91 from Germany, 95 from Spain, 82 from the United Kingdom
and 88 from France. Other demographics are as follows: 62% of the respondents were male
and 37% female; most respondents were between 25 and 34 years of age (42%), followed by
the 18–24 (24%) and 35–44 (23%) age groups; only 9% were 45–59 years of age and 1% were
60 years or older; 16% of the respondents declared that their primary source of income was
crowdsourcing; 32% stated that digital jobs are their main source of income; and 51%
claimed traditional jobs as primary source of income.

4.2 Procedure
Before they began the survey, respondents learned about data protection and agreed to
participate voluntarily in the survey. After they had given their consent, they answered
questions about life satisfaction; the influence of COVID-19 on everyday work life; predictions
about the influence of COVID-19 on the digital transformation of work; income security of
crowdsourcing, digital and traditional jobs (before COVID-19, now, future); experience with
COVID-19 and demographic variables. An attention check was included to exclude bots. Each
participant received $0.40, and responding to all questions took on average 6 min.

4.3 Measures
4.3.1 Satisfaction with current situation. To measure the satisfaction with different parts of
life, life satisfaction was measured with a questionnaire based on the German Socio-Economic
Panel (2020). Respondents responded on a ten-item scale from 1 (“not at all satisfied”) to 10
(“very satisfied”) to the question “How satisfied are you today with the following areas of your
life?” with regard to ten variables covering various parts of everyday life (e.g. job, personal
income, free time).
4.3.2 Influence of COVID-19 on everyday work life. Seven questions measured the influence
of the pandemic on the working reality. Some questions (e.g. “Do you work from home on a
regular basis?” “Do you work from home because of COVID-19?”) could be answered with
“yes”, “no” and “from time to time”. Other questions asked, for example, about the extent to
which respondents’ work life and income had been influenced. These questions were Influence of the
measured on a ten-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“no influence”) to 10 (“major influence”). COVID-19
4.3.3 Predictions about the influence of COVID-19 on the digital transformation of work.
Respondents next evaluated how COVID-19 could change work. A seven-point Likert scale
pandemic
from 1 (“totally disagree”) to 7 (“totally agree”) measured level of agreement with seven
sentences (e.g. “Based on my experience with COVID-19, I believe that digital forms of work
will establish faster”; “Based on my experience with COVID-19, I believe that in the future
there will be more situations that require digital work”).
4.3.4 Income security. Respondents were provided with the definitions of traditional jobs,
digital work and crowdsourcing. Then, they were asked to provide their opinion on the
sentence, “To me digital work is a secure source of income right now”, on a seven-point Likert
scale from 1 (“totally disagree”) to 7 (“totally agree”). They also had the option to state that the
sentence was “not applicable”. The question was adapted to measure the perceived income
security of traditional jobs and crowdsourcing. In addition, the time varied. The question
asked whether the three work forms were a secure source of income before COVID-19, during
COVID-19 and if they will be in the future.
4.3.5 Experience with COVID-19 and demographic variables. As a control variable, the
questionnaire measured personal experience with COVID-19. Respondents also indicated the
extent to which they were concerned about contracting COVID-19 on a five-point Likert-type
scale from 1 (“not at all concerned”) to 5 (“very concerned”). The survey concluded with
questions about age, gender, education, main source of income (traditional job, digital work or
crowdsourcing), marital status and number of people living in the household.

5. Analyses and results

5.1 Statistical analyses
The data were analysed with paired t-tests and multiple regression. To test the first hypothesis,
I determined the amount of people working remotely before and during COVID-19. To analyse
the second hypothesis, respondents were divided into two groups with regard to their answers
to the statement, “Based on my experience with COVID-19, I believe that digital forms of work
will establish faster”. Then, I determined the significance of group differences.
I used multiple regression to explore whether working remotely had an influence on job
satisfaction (H3). The analysis comprised four stages. In addition, a multiple regression with
two models was used to explore whether people believing in an increased spread of digital
transformation due to COVID-19 are more likely to imagine working exclusively from home
digitally in the future (H4). To answer RQ1 and RQ2, I analysed the variable income security
using paired t-tests.

5.2 Results
5.2.1 More people working in the home office. First, I analysed whether individuals who work
in the home office during COVID-19 already had previous experience with this form of work
(RQ1). Figure 1 shows that before the COVID-19 crisis, 33% of the respondents worked from
home on a regular basis, 24% worked from the home office from time to time and 42% did not
work from home at all. Figure 2 shows that since COVID-19, 59% reported working from
home, 5% worked from home from time to time and 35% did not use the home office. The
number of people working from home because of the virus increased by 27%. At the same
time, the amount of people working in the home office from time to time and the amount of
people not working at home decreased by 19% and 8%, respectively. These results show that
the increase is mostly due to people who already have experience in working from a home.
IJSSP

Figure 1.
Amount of people
working in the home
office before COVID-19
crisis (N 5 554)

Figure 2.
Amount of people
working in the home
office during COVID-19
crisis (N 5 554)

5.2.2 Changes in secure source of income. Figure 4 shows the results for RQ2 (“Has the
importance of traditional and digital jobs as a secure source of income changed given the
COVID-19 pandemic?”) and RQ3 (“Do people predict that digital jobs are more likely to be a
secure source of income in the future than before and during the COVID-19 pandemic?”).
I used a t-test to determine whether the mean values for the perception of traditional jobs and
digital work forms in the past and during COVID-19 differ (Note that for this analysis, the
variable digital work forms does not include crowdsourcing). Figure 3 shows a significant
difference in the importance of traditional (1% level) and digital (5% level) jobs before and
during COVID-19, as a secure source of income. Therefore, I conclude that the importance of
traditional jobs as a secure source of income decreased and the importance of traditional jobs
increased slightly. Figure 4 also shows the prediction for digital work and traditional work
 Influence of the
COVID-19
pandemic

Figure 3.
Importance of
traditional and digital
work forms as a secure
source income (mean)
Note(s): ***p < 0.01; **p < 0.05; *p < 0.10

Figure 4.
Digital work will
establish faster due to
COVID-19 (N 5 554)

forms as a secure source of income in the future. There is a significant (1% level) increase in
the importance of digital work over time. Therefore, people predict that digital jobs are more
likely to be a secure source of income in the future than before and during the COVID-19
pandemic. Furthermore, people predict that traditional jobs will again increase in importance
in the future, but they are considered significantly (1% level) less important as a secure source
of income than before the pandemic.
IJSSP 5.2.3 Digital work forms establish faster due to COVID-19. The descriptive analysis of the
item “Based on my experience with COVID-19, I believe that digital forms of work will
establish faster” (H1) shows that more people agree with this statement than reject it
(Figure 4), though 13.9% of the statements are in the centre of the Likert scale, indicating no
tendency towards either side. 77 Individuals without a tendency were excluded in the
analysis. The results of the Shapiro–Wilk test show that the sample is normally distributed.
Therefore, the requirements for a paired t-test are fulfilled.
A paired t-test on a sample of 477 shows a significant difference (p < 0.001) between people
who believe in an increase of digital work forms (M 5 0.67; SD 5 0.021) and people who do not
(M 5 0.32; SD 5 0.021). H2 is therefore accepted.
5.2.4 Home office and job satisfaction. To test H2, I calculated a linear regression with four
models (Table 1). The analysis of the Pearson correlation coefficient and the Spearman
coefficient shows a linear relationship between the variables, therefore a linear model
describes the experimental data adequately. I did not take into account people who reported
working in their home office from time to time, because they cannot be clearly assigned to
their place of work. Model 1 represents the focal effect of the variable home office through
COVID-19 (yes, no) and satisfaction with job situation, showing that people reporting
working from home (ß 5 1.03) are significantly more satisfied with their job situation than
people not working from home at a 1% level. The adjusted R-square shows, however, that
only approximately 3% of the variance can be explained by the included variables.
Model 2 includes the variables fear of infection with COVID-19, primary source of income
(i.e. crowdsourcing, traditional jobs or digital work), increase of digital transformation, more
remote work necessary in the future and preference of a home office job in the future. The
influence of working remotely remains highly significant, but no additional variance is
explained.
When I include the variables satisfaction with personal income and household income in
Model 3, the effect of the variable home office disappears. Instead, a low significant, positive
effect (10% level) of household income and a high significant, positive effect (at the 1% level)
of personal income on job satisfaction can be observed. Accordingly, people who are satisfied
with their financial situation are also more satisfied with their job situation. Personal income
(ß 5 0.62) has a stronger effect on satisfaction with job situation than household income
(ß 5 0.08). In Model 3, the adjusted R-square increases to 47%.
The variables country, gender and age, which increased in Model 4, clear up 48% of the
variance. Here, the effect of the variable household income disappears. However, the influence
of satisfaction on personal income (ß 5 0.58) remains highly significant (1% level). In
addition, people living in Italy, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom are significantly
more dissatisfied with their current job situation than people living in the United States. The
effect can be observed at the 1% level for Germany, 5% level for Italy and Spain and 10%
level for the United Kingdom. Age and gender have no significant influence on satisfaction
with the job situation. Accordingly, country and satisfaction with personal income have an
influence on the satisfaction with the job situation. Home office has no influence; therefore, H2
is rejected.
5.2.5 More digital transformation and greater willingness to work remotely. To test H3,
I calculated a multiple linear regression with two models (Table 2). The analysis of the
Pearson correlation coefficient and the Spearman coefficient shows a linear relationship
between the variables, therefore a linear model describes the experimental data adequately.
To control for home office, primary source of income and preference for a home office job in
the future, these variables were included as covariates in Model 2. Model 1 shows a strongly
significant influence (1% level) of believing that COVID-19 has accelerated the digital
transformation of work (ß 5 0.53) and believing that more situations in the future will require
remote work (ß 5 0.20) on likelihood of exclusively working digitally in the future. These two
 (1) (2) (3) (4)
Influence of the
Sit. job satis. Sit. job satis. Sit. job satis. Sit. job satis. COVID-19
pandemic
Home office (Ref. No home office)
Yes 1.03*** 1.04*** 0.29 0.25
(0.23) (0.24) (0.19) (0.19)
Scared being infected 0.04 0.05 0.09
(0.11) (0.09) (0.09)
Primary income (Ref. crowd)
Digital work 0.31 0.14 0.14
(0.34) (0.25) (0.25)
Traditional job 0.02 0.14 0.12
(0.32) (0.24) (0.24)
Digitalisation faster 0.03 0.04 0.01
(0.12) (0.09) (0.09)
Fut. more home office 0.08 0.15 0.14
(0.11) (0.09) (0.08)
Fut. job home office 0.04 0.01 0.01
(0.09) (0.07) (0.07)
Satisfied household income 0.08* 0.08
(0.05) (0.05)
Satisfied personal income 0.62*** 0.58***
(0.05) (0.05)
Country (Ref. USA)
Italy 0.70**
(0.28)
Germany 0.96***
(0.30)
Spain 0.67**
(0.28)
UK 0.51*
(0.31)
France 0.45
(0.31)
Sex 0.30
(0.17)
Age 0.12
(0.09)
N 506 501 477 477
Adj. R2 0.03 0.03 0.47 0.48 Table 1.
Root MSE 2.50 2.50 1.83 1.81 Linear regression on
Constant 5.27 4.98 1.69 1.66 satisfaction with the
Note(s): *p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 (Std. Err.) current job situation

variables account for 51% of the variance in this model, meaning that people who believe in a
digital future in the near future are also more likely to imagine working digitally exclusively.
After adding the variables preference for a home office job in the future, working remotely
because of COVID-19 and the primary source of income, these effects remain strongly
significant in Model 2. The stronger the preference of a person to work remotely in the future
(ß 5 0.20), the more likely he or she is to imagine exclusively working digitally (1% level). In
this analysis, I distinguished between people who already worked from home before COVID-
19 and those who only began working from home when the COVID-19 pandemic began. The
results show that people who already worked from home (ß 5 0.31) can imagine themselves
significantly (5% level) more likely to work exclusively digitally in the future than people who
have not worked remotely in the past. For people who are new to working remotely because of
IJSSP (1) (2)
Exclusively digital work Exclusively digital work

Digitalisation faster 0.53*** 0.53***

(0.06) (0.06)
Fut. more home office 0.20*** 0.19***
(0.06) (0.05)
Fut. job home office 0.20***
(0.04)
(0.05)
Home office (Ref. No home office)
Yes, due to COVID-19 0.26
(0.15)
Yes 0.31**
(0.17)
Primary income (Ref. crowd)
Digital work 0.16
(0.16)
Traditional job 0.08
(0.18)
N 552 517
Table 2. Adj. R2 0.53 0.56
Linear regress on Root MSE 1.82 1.24
exclusively working Constant 0.70 0.20
digitally Note(s): *p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 (Std. Err.)

the COVID-19 pandemic, no significant effect emerges. Besides the effect of working at home
diminishes if the country of the respondents is included in the analysis (Appendix, Table A1).
The preference to work digitally exclusively in the future does not differ significantly
depending on the current primary source of income. This result shows that the more a person
believes in fast digital change, the more he or she can imagine working exclusively digitally.
Thus, the data confirm H3.

6. Discussion
The aim of this research was to investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced
the acceleration of digital transformation of labour. I observed a significant increase in people
working from home, using technologies in their daily work life, consistent with previous
studies (B
eland et al., 2020; Spurk and Straub, 2020; St€urz et al., 2020; Von Gaudecker et al.,
2020). However, these studies do not verify the extent to which these people have previously
used technology in their everyday work. Figures 1 and 2 show that the increase in working
remotely on a regular basis due to the COVID-19 pandemic is mainly a result of the changes in
the working behaviour of people who occasionally worked remotely before the pandemic,
possibly because these people were more likely to have the necessary infrastructure and
competence to implement a quick change without problems. Even if the increase in working
remotely is a short-term effect of COVID-19 on daily work routines, the data also show that
people predict digital work forms to be significantly more important in the future than they
were before the pandemic.
The results capture a moment in time during the COVID-19 pandemic, and predictions
about, for example, secure sources of income and development of digital jobs reflect
respondents’ point of view. This study did not investigate consequences of the pandemic that
could influence this development (e.g. rising unemployment, economic downturn); future
studies could investigate this topic at a later point in time. The results, however, show a quick Influence of the
assessment of the obstacles of technological change and the willingness to adopt digital COVID-19
forms of work. Willingness to change is a construct that could be helpful in understanding
and predicting behaviour at an organisational level (Metselaar, 1997). Willingness to change
pandemic
represents a positive behavioural intention towards the implementation of changes in the
work processes of an organisation, which leads to efforts of the organisation’s members to
support, improve and thus drive the change process (Metselaar, 1997). The data can therefore
be interpreted as the basis or prerequisite for change.
The results show that people consider digital work forms significantly more likely to be a
secure source of income than traditional jobs. Regarding the influence of the COVID-19
pandemic, it should be taken into account that the digital transformation has been in process
for several years (European Commission, 2017), and digital jobs could have become more
important in the future even without COVID-19. However, the data show that most people
believe that the pandemic has accelerated the digital transformation of work. These people
are also more likely to imagine working exclusively digitally. This result remains robust after
controlling for the primary source of income, which shows that those who have experience
engaging in digital work forms are able to imagine doing so exclusively.
The results show that many people are willing to take part in the digital job transformation
and that personal income has a substantial influence on job satisfaction (Table 1). However, no
significant effect of home office on job satisfaction could be found in the data. Since the data was
collected at the beginning of the pandemic, it is possible that individuals need to get used to this
new work situation. It is also possible that working remotely is not yet efficient enough at this
point (e.g. availability of right technologies, consultation with superiors and colleagues).
A survey at a later date, which will examine the working conditions in the home office more
closely, is necessary to get a more concrete overview.
Companies should investigate how to ensure the job satisfaction of people in the home
office. One way could be to invest more in remote work technology to make the use of this
form of work more efficient. Overall, a balance between traditional and remote models should
be considered in the transformation of work. As remote work spreads, the development of
remote work policies by human resource departments and policymakers must also be
accelerated. This is important to ensure the protection of employees.

7. Limitations
This research has three limitations, which should be considered when drawing conclusions
from the analyses. First, the data were collected on a crowdsourcing platform. Even if the
majority of the respondents do not state crowdsourcing as their primary source of income, it can
be assumed that they may have already had a certain affinity and experience with digital work.
Second, the data were collected at early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. The spread of
the pandemic was at different stages in the countries in which surveys were collected. In
addition, the governments of these countries exhibited significant differences in the measures
taken. Considering 66% of the data set reported an age of 18–34 years, the respondents were
rather young, which might have influenced their acceptance of digital work forms and
willingness to implement them in their lives.
Third, the participants of the study see the conditions under which they are working on a
task before they process it. Amazon Mechanical Turk provides them with the average time it
takes to process a task and the salary paid. This leads to self-selection of the participants and
to a non-probability sample.

8. Conclusion
This study shows that the basis for digital change in the time of COVID-19 is solid. The
pandemic has increased the number of people working remotely, and people view it as an
IJSSP accelerator of digital transformation. In addition, people perceive that their experience with
the pandemic has made them more likely to work digitally exclusively, especially people who
perceive that the pandemic has caused rapid change. Furthermore, the importance of digital
work as a secure source of income has increased. Job satisfaction does not differ between
people who work remotely and those who continue to work at their workplace; satisfaction
with personal income has a great influence. The results show that people perceive a change in
the importance of different job forms through COVID-19. Based on respondents’ assessments,
it appears that more people are willing to switch from a job exclusively to digital work. Given
the assessments of the respondents and the promotion of digital transformation, it appears
that more people are willing to switch from going to a workplace to exclusively living from
digital work. Although the results confirm the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the
acceleration of digital transformation, further studies are necessary to confirm this statement
in the long run.

References
Adams-Prassl, A., Boneva, T., Golin, M. and Rauh, C. (2020), “The large and unequal impact of
COVID-19 on workers”, VoxEU.org. Library Catalog: VoxEU, available at: https://voxeu.org/
article/large-andunequal-impact-covid-19-workers.
Anderson-Connolly, R., Grunberg, L., Greenberg, E.S. and Moore, S. (2002), “Is lean mean? Workplace
transformation and employee well-being”, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 389-413.
Baturay, M.H., G€okçearslan, Ş. and Ke, F. (2017), “The relationship among pre-service teachers’
computer competence, attitude towards computer-assisted education, and intention of
technology acceptance”, International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 9
No. 1, pp. 1-13.
B
eland, L.-P., Brodeur, A. and Wright, T. (2020), “The short-term economic consequences of Covid-19:
exposure to disease, remote work and government response”, IZA Institute of Labor
Economics, available at: https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13159/the-short-term-economic-
consequences-of-covid-19-exposure-to-disease-remote-work-and-government-response.
Bick, A. and Blandin, A. (2020), “Real time labor market estimates during the 2020 coronavirus
outbreak”, working paper, Arizona State University, available at: https://ssrn.com/
abstract=3692425.
Brakman, S., Garretsen, H. and van Witteloostuijn, A. (2020), “The turn from just-in-time to just-in-
case globalization in and after times of COVID-19: an essay on the risk re-appraisal of borders
and buffers”, Social Sciences and Humanities Open, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Coibion, O., Gorodnichenko, Y. and Weber, M. (2020), “Labor markets during the Covid-19 crisis: a
preliminary view”, NBER Working Paper No. 27017, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Danish, R.Q. and Usman, A. (2010), “Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and
motivation: an empirical study from Pakistan”, International Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 159-167.
Eberhard, B., Podio, M., Alonso, A., Radovica, E., Avotina, L., Peiseniece, L., Caama~
no Sendon, M.,
Gonzales Lozano, A. and Sol
e-Pla, J. (2017), “Smart work: the transformation of the labour
market due to the fourth industrial revolution (I4. 0)”, International Journal of Business and
Economic Sciences Applied Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 47-66.
European Commission (2017), A Concept Paper on Digitalisation, Employability and Inclusiveness,
D.-G.f.C.N., Content and Technology, available at: ec.europa.eu.
European Commission (2020), “European construction plan”, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/
live-work-travel-eu/health/coronavirus-response/recovery-plan-europe_de (accessed 20
July 2020).
European Union (2020), ““The EU budget powering” the recovery plan for Europe”, available at: Influence of the
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/factsheet_1_en.pdf (accessed 12 July 2020).
COVID-19
Finn, C.P. (2001), “Autonomy: an important component for nurses’ job satisfaction”, International
Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 349-357.
pandemic
Fried, Y. and Ferris, G.R. (1987), “The validity of the job characteristics model: a review and meta-
analysis”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 287-322.
Gelbrich, K. and Sattler, B. (2014), “Anxiety, crowding, and time pressure in public self-service
technology acceptance”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 82-94.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1975), “Development of the job diagnostic survey”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Hirsh, J.B., Mar, R.A. and Peterson, J.B. (2012), “Psychological entropy: a framework for understanding
uncertainty-related anxiety”, Psychological Review, Vol. 119 No. 2, pp. 304-320.
Kohnke, O. (2017), It’s It's not just about technology: the people side of digitization, in Oswald, G. and
Kleinemeier, M. (Eds), Shaping the Digital Enterprise, Springer, Waldorf, pp. 69-91.
Men
endez, L.S. and Castro, L.C. (2002), “Coping with environmental pressures: Public Research
Organizations responses to funding crisis”, Documentos de Trabajo (CSIC. Unidad de Pol
ıticas
Comparadas), Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Metselaar, E.E. (1997), “Assessing the willingness to change: construction and validation of the
DINAMO”, doctoral thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
Molino, M., Cortese, C.G. and Ghislieri, C. (2020), “The promotion of technology acceptance and work
engagement in industry 4.0: from personal resources to information and training”, International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 17 No. 7, p. 2438.
Momani, A.M. and Jamous, M. (2017), “The evolution of technology acceptance theories”, International
Journal of Contemporary Computer Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 51-58.
Naqvi, S.R., Ishtiaq, M., Kanwal, N. and Ali, M. (2013), “Impact of job autonomy on organizational
commitment and job satisfaction: the moderating role of organizational culture in fast food
sector of Pakistan”, International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 8 No. 17,
pp. 92-102.
Rosa, H. (2014), “From work-life to work-age balance? Acceleration, alienation, and appropriation at
the workplace”, in The Impact of ICT on Quality of Working Life, Springer, Berlin, pp. 43-61.
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F. and Tondeur, J. (2019), “The technology acceptance model (TAM): a meta-
analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers” adoption of digital
technology in education”, Computers and Education, Vol. 128, pp. 13-35.
Shkalenko, A. and Fadeeva, E. (2020), “Analysis of the impact of digitalization on the development of
foreign economic activity during COVID-19 pandemic”, in 2nd International Scientific and
Practical Conference “Modern Management Trends and the Digital Economy: from Regional
Development to Global Economic Growth”(MTDE 2020), Atlantis Press, Paris, pp. 1190-1195.
Socio-Economic Panel (2020), “Socio-economic panel questionnaires”, doi: 10.5684/soep.v3y (accessed 2
March 2020).
Spurk, D. and Straub, C. (2020), “Flexible employment relationships and careers in times of the
COVID-19 pandemic”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 119, pp. 2-4.
urz, C.S., Mendel, U. and Harhoff, D. (2020), “Digitalisierung durch Corona? Verbreitung und
St€
Akzeptanz von Homeoffice in Deutschland”, working paper, Bavarian Research Institute for
Digital Transformation, available at: https://www.bidt.digital/studie-homeoffice/.
Sullivan, C. (2003), “What’s in a name? Definitions and conceptualisations of teleworking and
homeworking”, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 158-165.
Taherdoost, H. (2018), “A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories”,
Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 22, pp. 960-967.
IJSSP Tessema, M.T., Ready, K.J. and Embaye, A.B. (2013), “The effects of employee recognition, pay, and
benefits on job satisfaction: cross country evidence”, Journal of Business and Economics, Vol. 4
No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003), “User acceptance of information
technology: toward a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 425-478.
Vial, G. (2019), “Understanding digital transformation: a review and a research agenda”, The Journal
of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 118-144.
Von Gaudecker, H.-M., Holler, R., Janys, L., Siflinger, B. and Zimpelmann, C. (2020), Labour Supply in
the Early Stages of the CoViD-19 Pandemic: Empirical Evidence on Hours, Home Office, and
Expectations, IZA Institute of Labor Economics, IZA DP No. 13158, available at: https://ssrn.
com/abstract=3579251.
Wilks, L. and Billsberry, J. (2007), “Should we do away with teleworking? An examination of whether
teleworking can be defined in the new world of work”, New Technology, Work and Employment,
Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 168-177.

Corresponding author
Lisa Nagel can be contacted at: lisa.nagel@uni-bremen.de
Appendix Influence of the
COVID-19
pandemic
(1) (2) (3)
Excl. digital work Excl. digital work Excl. digital work

Digitalisation faster 0.53*** 0.53*** 0.56***

(0.06) (0.06) (0.06)
Fut. more home office 0.20*** 0.19*** 0.18***
(0.06) (0.05) (0.05)
Fut. job home office 0.20*** 0.20***
(0.04) (0.04)
Home office (Ref. No home office)
Yes, due to COVID-19 0.26* 0.22
(0.14) (0.15)
Yes 0.31* 0.23
(0.16) (0.17)
Primary income (Ref. crowd)
Digital work 0.14 0.26
(0.17) (0.18)
Traditional job 0.06 0.14
(0.16) (0.17)
Satisfied personal income 0.03
(0.04)
Satisfied household income 0.04
(0.03)
Satisfied free time 0.02
(0.02)
Satisfied job situation 0.01
(0.03)
Country (Ref. USA)
Italy 0.29
(0.20)
Germany 0.54***
(0.20)
Spain 0.26
(0.19)
UK 0.25
(0.20)
France 0.07
(0.20)
Sex 0.03
(0.12)
Age 0.04
(0.06)
N 552 518 472
Table A1.
R2 0.51 0.54 0.57 Linear regression on
Root MSE 1.82 1.24 1.21 exclusively working
Constant 0.70 0.49 0.13 digitally controlling for
Note(s): *p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 (Std. Err.) country