1 s2.0 S1162908822001189 Main

Journal Pre-proof
Enforced Remote Work During COVID-19 and The Importance of

Technological Competency: A Job Demands-Resources Perspective
Ayse Karaca Melike Eger Aydogmus Nilgun Gunbas
PII: S1162-9088(22)00118-9
DOI: https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.erap.2022.100867
Reference: ERAP 100867
To appear in: Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée
Received Date: 22 September 2021

Revised Date: 14 November 2022
Accepted Date: 23 December 2022
Please cite this article as: Karaca A, Aydogmus ME, Gunbas N, Enforced Remote Work
During COVID-19 and The Importance of Technological Competency: A Job
Demands-Resources Perspective, European Review of Applied Psychology (2022),
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2022.100867
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as
the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the
definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and
review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early
visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be
discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal
pertain.
© 2022 Published by Elsevier.

TECHNOLOGICAL COMPETENCY: A JOB DEMANDS-RESOURCES PERSPECTIVE
Enforced Remote Work During COVID-19 and The Importance of Technological Competency: A Job Demands-
Resources Perspective
Enforced Remote Work During COVID-19 and The Importance of Technological
Competency: A Job Demands-Resources Perspective
Télétravail Forcé Pendant La COVID-19 Et L’importance Des Compétence
Technologique : Perspective D’exigences-Ressources De L’épuisement Professionnel
f
oo
Ayse Karaca1, Melike Eger Aydogmus2, Nilgun Gunbas3
1
Department of Business Administration, Kutahya Dumlupinar University, TURKEY
pr
2
Department of Psychology, Hacettepe University, TURKEY
e-
3
Department of Education, Kars Kafkas University, TURKEY
Pr
Author Note
Ayse Karaca, Ph.D (Corresponding Author)
Kütahya Dumlupinar Universitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü,

al
Evliya Çelebi Yerleşkesi Tavşanlı Yolu 10. km Kütahya, TURKEY

rn
Tel: +90 553 3476364 Fax: +90 274 2652013 E-mail: ayse.karaca@dpu.edu.tr
u
Melike Eger Aydogmus, Ph.D

Jo
Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Psikoloji Bölümü, 06800 Beytepe Ankara,
TURKEY
Tel: +90 530 0701727 Fax: +90 312 2992008 E-mail:melike.aydogmus@hacettepe.edu.tr
Nilgun Gunbas, Ed.D
Kafkas Üniversitesi, Dede Korkut Eğitim Fakültesi, Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitim
Bölümü, 36100 Kars, TURKEY
Page 1 of 52
Tel: +90 546 8574079 Fax: +90 474 2251160 E-mail: ng2248@tc.columbia.edu
Abstract
Background: As we live in the era of technology, it is clear that employees’ technical skills and savviness are
important to their work performance. With the COVID-19 pandemic, these qualities have become a “necessity” for
many employees as they have switched to remote working. Less attention, however, has been given to empirical
evidence regarding how employees’ technological competencies influence their work outcomes during a forced shift
to remote work. Integrating the theories of Job Demands-Resources and Conservation of Resources, this study
sought to provide evidence regarding the joint effect of job/personal resources and technological competency on
f
oo
levels of employees’ remote work engagement and performance.
Method: A total of 131 teachers working in Turkey completed an online survey during the initial months of the
pr
COVID-19 pandemic. SPSS Process Macro (Model 7) was used for hypotheses testing.
Results: We found partial support for the proposed moderated mediation model. Specifically, psychological
e-
resilience (as a personal resource) increased the level of work performance through work engagement and this
relationship was stronger among employees with high levels of technological competency. However, the results did
Pr
not provide support for the hypothesized interaction effect of workplace support (as a job resource) and technological
competency on work performance through work engagement.

al
Conclusion: This research advances the theoretical and empirical understanding of the role of technological
competency in the motivational process of the Job Demands-Resources model. Our findings suggest that providing
rn
training activities aimed at promoting employee learning in the domain of online work tools can accelerate the effect
of personal resources on work outcomes, especially during enforced remote working, as in the case of COVID-19.
u
Jo
Keywords, Covid-19 pandemic, enforced remote work, Job Demands-Resources Model, technological competency,
work outcomes
Page 2 of 52
Télétravail forcé pendant la COVID-19 et l’importance des compétence technologique : Perspective
d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement professionnel
Résume
Contexte : Comme nous vivons dans l’ère de la technologie, il est clair que les compétences techniques et le savoir-
faire des employés, sont important pour leur rendement au travail. Avec la pandémie de COVID-19, ces qualités sont
devenues une “nécessité” pour de nombreux employés qui sont passés au télétravail. Cependant, moins d’attention a
été accordée aux preuves empiriques concernant la façon dont les compétences technologiques des employés
influencent leurs résultats au travail pendant l’adaptation forcé au télétravail. En intégrant la théorie d’exigence
f
oo
ressources de l’épuisement professionnel et conservation des ressources, cette étude a cherché à fournir des preuves
concernant l’effet conjoint du travail/ressources personnel et des compétences technologiques sur les niveaux
d’engagement et rendement des employés au télétravail.
pr
Méthode : Un totale de 131 professeurs travaillant en Turquie ont répondu à un sondage en ligne pendant les
e-
premiers mois de la pandémie de COVID-19. Pour tester les hypothèses, le SPSS Process Macro (Model 7) a était
utilisé.
Pr
Résultats : Nous avons trouvé un soutien partiel pour le model de médiation modérée propose. Plus précisément, la
résilience psychologique (en tant que ressource personnelle) a augmenté le niveau de rendement au travail grâce à
l’engagement au travail, et cette relation était plus forte chez les employés ayant des niveaux élevés de compétence
al
technologique. Cependant, les résultats n’ont pas démontré l’hypothèse de l’effet d’interaction du soutient en milieu
rn
de travail (en tant que ressource professionnelle) et des compétences technologiques sur le rendement au travail par
le biais de l’engagement au travail.

u
Conclusion : Cette recherche fait progresser la compréhension théorique et empirique du rôle de la compétence
Jo
technologique dans le processus du modèle d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement professionnel. Nos résultats
suggèrent qu’offrir des activités de formations visant à promouvoir l’apprentissage des employés dans le domaine
des outils de travail en ligne peut accélérer l’effets des ressources personnelles sur les résultats au travail,
particulièrement pour le télétravail forcé, comme ce fut le cas durant la pandémie de COVID-19.
Mots-clés : pandémie de la Covid-19, Télétravail forcé, Modèle d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement
professionnel, compétences technologique, rendement au travail
Page 3 of 52
1. Introduction
The rules of work for many occupations changed due to the COVID-19 pandemic that
spread throughout the world. A number of employees started working remotely and this brought
new challenges such as dealing with technology and simultaneously managing work and family
issues. Although previous studies in the literature have already examined the possible advantages
and disadvantages of remote working (e.g., Eddleston & Mulki, 2017; Gajendran et al., 2015;
f
Perry et al., 2018), the existing research lacks to address the question of how the enforced remote
oo
work during the COVID-19 influenced employee work outcomes. A recent study, for example,
showed that employees experienced high levels of social isolation after a sudden shift to remote
pr
working due to the pandemic, which in turn increased their level of stress and decreased their
e-
productivity and satisfaction (Toscano & Zappalà, 2020). Similarly, another research found that
work-related loneliness led to depression through emotional exhaustion during enforced remote
Pr
working (Becker et al., 2022). In line with this, scholars called for more research to enhance our
knowledge about the factors associated with employees’ remote work experiences in the
al
pandemic context (Nyberg et al, 2021). Answering this call, the current study seeks to examine
rn
what factors may influence employees’ work performance during the enforced remote work
caused by COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, integrating the theories of Job Demands-Resources

u
(JD-R) and Conservation of Resources (COR), we propose a model where job and personal
Jo
resources affect employee performance via work engagement. We also predict that the
relationship between job/personal resources and work engagement is moderated by another
personal resource, which is technological competency. Further, we test a moderated mediation
where work engagement plays a mediator role by transmitting the interactive effect of
technological competency and job/personal resources on employee performance.
Page 4 of 52
The current research makes two contributions to the literature. First, substantial research
was published in the literature regarding the factors affecting employees’ remote work
experiences (Charalambous et al., 2019). However, much uncertainty still exists about what may
influence employee performance during a forced shift to remote working caused by a natural
disaster or public health crisis such as a pandemic. Considering that subsequent waves of the
COVID-19 pandemic are expected, it is critical to determine the factors that may have an
f
influence on employee performance. Hence, this study expands the limited knowledge on
oo
enforced remote working (e.g., Becker et al., 2022; Mäkikangas et al., 2022; Shamsi et al., 2021;
Toscano & Zappalà, 2020; Wang et al., 2021) by examining the antecedents and moderators of
pr
employee performance in the first wave of COVID-19. Next, with the COVID-19 pandemic,
e-
remote working became common across the world and thus the importance of technological
competency increased in employee performance. However, while working from home became
Pr
challenging for some professionals (e.g., teachers) it was not for other professionals (e.g.,
translators) due to an existing dependence on technology for work (Kramer & Kramer, 2020). In
al
this regard, the present research extends the motivational process of the JD-R model by
rn
suggesting that technological competency, as a personal resource, may enhance the positive
effects of job/personal resources on work-related outcomes. Such an effect could be derived

u
from the COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018) which suggests that different resources
Jo
may have synergistic effects such that they interact with each other to influence work outcomes.
To examine this issue, this study aims to frame technological competency as a personal resource
which moderates the effects of job/personal resources on work engagement.
1.1. The Motivational Process of the Job-Demands Resources Model
Different theoretical approaches revealed various definitions for job performance (Carpini
et al., 2017; Motowidlo & Van Scooter, 1994). However, it is generally conceptualized as a
5
Page 5 of 52
construct with three main parts, namely, task performance, contextual performance and
counterproductive performance (Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2019). While task performance refers to
the level of proficiency one has in their duties, contextual performance includes an employee’s
contributions to organizational, social, and psychological aspects of one’s work environment
(e.g., volunteering for extra tasks, helping colleagues) (Rotundo & Sackett, 2002). On the other
hand, counterproductive behavior includes deviant behaviors which negatively affect the
f
wellbeing of the organization (e.g., gossips about coworkers) (Rotundo & Sackett, 2002). While
oo
some research indicates that job performance is related to cognitive factors such as self-
evaluations (e.g., self-efficacy; Judge & Bono, 2001; Vancouver & Purl, 2017), other research
pr
focuses on the effects of personality related constructs (e.g., conscientiousness) (Neal et al.,
e-
2012), demographics (e.g., age, marital status) (Ng & Feldman, 2008) and job-related factors
(e.g., work experience, work engagement) (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Meneghel et al., 2016;
Pr
Rich et al., 2010).
According to the JD-R model, the level of employees’ performance in any occupation is
al
predicted by three main characteristics of their working conditions: Job demands, job resources
rn
and personal resources. Job demands (e.g., work overload, uncomfortable working conditions)
and job resources (e.g., social support, autonomy) are defined as “physical, psychological, social,
u
or organizational aspects of the job” (Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 501). On the other hand, personal
Jo
resources (e.g., self-esteem, optimism) refer to positive self-evaluations that enable an individual
to regulate and influence their environment successfully (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007a). According
to the JD-R model, both job and personal resources are functional and associated with positive
work experiences through a motivation-related process while job demands are associated with
certain costs through a strain-related process (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017).
Page 6 of 52
In explaining the factors affecting one’s occupational outcomes, the JD-R model
introduces two psychological processes, namely, health impairment process and motivational
process. The health impairment process predicts that job demands, or sustained physical and/or
psychological efforts to meet one’s job requirements, lead to negative outcomes (e.g., low
performance) through high levels of stress and burnout (Bakker et al., 2004; Bakker &
Demerouti, 2007; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007b). On the other hand, the motivational process
f
argues that job/personal resources result in positive outcomes (e.g., high performance) through
oo
high levels of work engagement (Bakker et al., 2008; Xanthopoulou et al., 2009a). The present
study seeks to understand the antecedents of employee performance based on the motivational
pr
process of the JD-R model. The main prediction of the motivational process is that job/personal
e-
resources influence employees’ work engagement, which in turn positively affects their
performance. Engagement at work refers to “a work-related and high-activation positive state,

Pr
characterized by high levels of energy (vigor), dedication, and absorption” (Bakker & Van
Wingerden, 2021, p.22). According to the JD-R model, the degree of work engagement can be
al
affected by both personal- and job- related resources. Specifically, the model argues that
rn
personal and job resources have the motivational potential to increase work engagement by
protecting people from demanding situations (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008). In line with this, we
u
propose that psychological resilience as a personal resource and workplace support as a job
Jo
resource will positively affect employee work engagement. We define psychological resilience as
“the ability to bounce back or recover from stress” (Smith et al., 2008, p.199) while workplace
support is the level of support employees receive from their colleagues and the administrators.
The reason behind choosing these two constructs in particular is that both psychological
resilience and workplace support protect people from negative effects of trauma (Malkoç &
Page 7 of 52
Yalçın, 2015; Pietrzak et al., 2009), thus we considered them to be more relevant in the context of
pandemic.
Regarding psychological resilience as an antecedent of work engagement, JD-R model
suggests that the higher employees’ personal resources, the more they would be motivated to
pursue their goals (Bakker, 2011). This is more important in stressful situations (e.g., COVID-
19) since employees may need greater personal resources (e.g., psychological resilience) to deal
f
with the ambiguity and uncertainties related to the situation (Avey et al., 2008; De Clercq, 2019;
oo
Shin et al., 2012). Thus, we predict that people who are resilient would be more motivated to
persevere throughout the pandemic, which in turn make them more engaged with their tasks. This
pr
is also consistent with the broaden and build theory (Fredrickson, 2001:220) which states that
e-
positive emotions “broaden people’s momentary thought-action repertoires, widening the array of
the thoughts and actions that come to mind.” In line with this, it is reasonable to predict that
Pr
employees who are psychologically resilient would have more positive emotions (Fredrickson &
Joiner, 2002; Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004; Wang et al., 2017), and thus have more room to
al
concentrate on their jobs regardless of surrounding conditions (King et al., 2020; Sweetman &
rn
Luthans, 2010; Wang et al., 2017). Indeed, empirical evidence from studies conducted both
before the pandemic (Kašpárková et al., 2018; Othman et al., 2013; Salmela-Aro & Upadyaya,
u
2018) and during the pandemic (Blaique et al., 2022; Ojo et al., 2021) also shows that resilience
Jo
leads to higher work engagement. Moreover, the literature on psychological capital (consisting of
resilience, hope, efficacy, and optimism) predicts that individuals with such positive states are
intrinsically motived to focus on their tasks and thus experience heightened work engagement
(Avey et al., 2008; Paek et al., 2015; Sweetman & Luthans, 2010).
Likewise, we propose that when employees’ perceptions of social support from their
colleagues and managers increase, they will be more willing to put their efforts into the task, and
8
Page 8 of 52
thus will have a higher work engagement. According to the self-determination theory, people
innately have the need to be related to others and to feel valued in their relationships. The
fulfillment of this psychological need predicts better psychological and physical health,
relationship quality and performance (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Social support is especially critical
during the pandemic as employees are likely to experience negative feelings such as stress,
worry, and uncertainty. In line with this, for example, Baker et al. (2021) found that support from
f
coworkers and administrators were the most helpful resources for teachers in coping with the
oo
pandemic. Similarly, the study by Shamsi et al. (2021) revealed that perceived team support was
positively related to work engagement when working remotely during the COVID-19. Moreover,
pr
Wang et al. (2021) showed that perceived social support increased employees’ work performance
e-
and well-being during the pandemic. Thus, we predict that having high levels of workplace
support may help employees to deal with the negative feelings (Jolly et al., 2021; Taylor, 2011)
Pr
caused by the pandemic and enable them to focus more on their tasks. Supporting this reasoning,
empirical research from the JD-R literature reports a positive effect of social support on work
al
engagement (Hakanen et al., 2006; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Based on this discussion, we
rn
propose the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1a. Psychological resilience increases work engagement during enforced

u
remote working.
Jo
Hypothesis 1b. Workplace support increases work engagement during enforced remote
working.
Another prediction of the motivational process has to do with the association between
work engagement and work performance. Specifically, in addition to the positive effects of job
and personal resources on work engagement, the model also proposes that engagement in turn
will positively influence one’s performance. In the literature, the term “psychological presence”
9
Page 9 of 52
is used to define personally engaging behaviors at work (Kahn, 1990). As the level of presence at
work increases, employees attribute more meaning to the tasks they are responsible for and their
positions, and this in turn makes them better performers (Kahn, 1990). Relatedly, research shows
that engaged workers are healthier, more energetic, more open to experiences and more
conscientious, all of which make them more creative and better problem solvers (Bakker et al.,
2014). Confirming this, several studies on the JD-R model demonstrated a positive effect of work
f
engagement on both in-role and extra-role performance (Bakker & Bal, 2010; Caesens &
oo
Stinglhamber, 2014; Christian et al., 2011). Therefore, we predict that employees who have a
higher work engagement would perform better during the enforced remote work caused by
pr
COVID-19 pandemic. Based on this, we hypothesize the following:
e-
Hypothesis 2. Work engagement is positively associated with work performance during
enforced remote working.

Pr
1.2. The Role of Technological Competency
The COVID-19 pandemic led to many changes in the lives of employees as well as in
al
work practices. One of these changes was the increasing use of technology as a result of working
rn
virtually. Specifically, the COVID-19 compelled most workers to use technology as part of their
u
job duties since they had been required to work from home. While this transition process was
Jo
easy for some employees, it was stressful for some others (e.g., teachers; Baker et al., 2021;
Sokal et al., 2020b; Truzoli et al., 2021) as they were not dependent on the technology before the
pandemic. Indeed, studies demonstrate that employees may feel tenseness and anxiety when
using new technology (i.e., technostress; Brod, 1984) and this may result in a variety of negative
outcomes (Jena, 2015; Ragu-Nathan et al., 2008; Tarafdar et al., 2011). Relatedly, research shows
that employee knowledge regarding technology use affects a variety of emotions such as anxiety
10
Page 10 of 52
and anger (Kay, 2008). Thus, it begs the question: How do technological competencies affect
work experiences of individuals who have switched to remote working as a result of the
pandemic? Based on the JD-R and COR theories, we argue in this study that, different resources
may have synergistic effects such that technological competency, as a personal resource, may
enhance the positive effects of job/personal resources on work engagement.
The term technological competency can be defined differently based on the focus of the
f
study. In the present research, we define technological competency as the ability of an employee
oo
to use a particular field of technology effectively while performing work-related tasks. Because it
is conceptualized as positive evaluations of employees about their digital competencies, this
pr
construct is considered a personal resource in our model. As in the case of similar constructs such
e-
as “digital competence” or “self-efficacy in technology use,” technological competency in this
study is captured through the perceptions of employees regarding their ability to use technology
Pr
when performing their job duties. It should be noted that although the constructs of self-efficacy
and technological competency seem similar, they are different because self-efficacy is a broader
al
concept and includes not only the ability to use of technology but also many other factors that
rn
may affect one’s success at a task.
Regarding the role of technological competency as a moderator of the workplace support

u
and work engagement relationship, we have both theoretical and empirical support from the JD-R
Jo
literature that it may moderate the relationship between job resources (workplace support) and
work engagement. That is, the studies indicate that personal resources may enhance the positive
effects of job resources on engagement (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014; Taris et al., 2017) and that
employees with more personal resources would be “more motivated and better able to spot
resources in the changing environment and use them to their advantage, resulting in improved
performance and engagement” (Van den Heuvel et al., 2010, p.140). This is also consistent with
11
Page 11 of 52
the COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018) which suggests that different resources may
have synergistic effects in influencing work outcomes. Moreover, there exists empirical research
revealing evidence regarding the moderating effect of personal resources on the association
between job resources and engagement (Van den Broeck et al., 2011). Thus, we predict that the
positive effects of workplace support on work engagement would be more salient for employees
with a high level of technological competency than their counterparts.
f
Although JD-R model does not explicitly propose that personal resources moderate the
oo
relationship between other personal resources and work engagement, in their critical review of
the JD-R model, Schaufeli and Taris (2014, p.57) indicates that "personal resources can be
pr
integrated into the JD-R model in various ways; at present there is no single best way of
e-
extending the JD-R model to include personal resources.” The authors also argue that “personal
resources do matter, but the specific explanatory framework determines how they should be
Pr
integrated into the model” (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014, p.57). In our research, there are both
theoretical and empirical bases for expecting technological competency (as a personal resource)
al
to accelerate the positive effect of psychological resilience (another personal resource) on work
rn
engagement. That is, COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018) argues that resources
generate other resources (resource caravans) and that different resources may interact with each
u
other to influence outcomes. Building on the COR theory, we test whether the two types of
Jo
personal resources have synergistic effects such that high levels of one accelerate the positive
impact of the other. In other words, we expect that employees who already are in possession of
resources (such as technological competency) may use these resources to generate more
resources (resiliency) and the interaction between the two types of resource will lead to higher
work engagement. Thus, we predict that technological competency or self-efficacy in technology
use might increase the experienced level of resilience by making individuals to have more
12
Page 12 of 52
positive emotions, less stress, and higher cognitive energy. This is consistent with the self-
efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997) which argues that people with high self-efficacy beliefs would
have more positive feelings, are more successful in dealing with the stressors, and use their
resources more effectively (Burić et al., 2020; Luszczynska et al., 2005). On the other hand,
employees with low self-efficacy beliefs may view them less capable to deal with the stressors
and thus have more negative emotions (Burić et al., 2020; Luszczynska et al., 2005; Schwarzer &
f
Hallum, 2008). In line with this, empirical research also shows that during remote working,
oo
employees with high work-related self-efficacy beliefs experience lower levels of stress and
higher levels of resilience (Staples et al., 1999; Ojo et al., 2021). Thus, we predict that when
pr
employees have a high level of technological competency, the positive effect of psychological
e-
resilience on work engagement would be higher due to the synergistic effects of technological
competency and resilience. Based on this discussion, we propose the following hypotheses:
Pr
Hypothesis 3a. Technological competency moderates the positive relationship between
psychological resilience and work engagement, such that the positive relationship is strengthened
al
as technological competency increases.

rn
Hypothesis 3b. Technological competency moderates the positive relationship between
workplace support and work engagement, such that the positive relationship is strengthened as
u
technological competency increases.

Jo
Thus far, we have explained how psychological resilience and workplace support lead to
work engagement, which in turn affects work performance. In addition, we have proposed the
moderating role of technological competency in the relationship between psychological
resilience/workplace support and work engagement. With our overall model, we also predict a
moderated mediation relationship in which the effect of the interaction between psychological
resilience/workplace support and technological competency will influence work performance.

13
Page 13 of 52
That is, employees who perceive high workplace support and are psychologically resilient will
perform better if they also feel that they are technologically competent. We further propose that it
is through work engagement that the joint effect of psychological resilience/workplace support
and technological competency influences work performance. Indeed, in the motivational process
of the JD-R model, work engagement has been shown to be an important mediator in the
association between job/personal resources and work outcomes (Airila et al., 2014; Bakker &
f
Bal, 2010; Hakanen et al., 2006). Thus, we propose the following hypotheses:
oo
Hypothesis 4a. Work engagement mediates the effect of the interaction between
psychological resilience and technological competency on work performance.
pr
Hypothesis 4b. Work engagement mediates the effect of the interaction between
e-
workplace support and technological competency on work performance.
The theoretical framework of the study is shown in Figure 1.

Pr
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 about here
-----------------------------------------------------------------
al
2. Method
rn
2.1. Sample and Procedure
The data for this study was collected during the initial months of the COVID-19
u
pandemic (2020 Spring Semester). A snowball sampling technique was used to recruit the study
Jo
sample; an online survey was sent to participants who then forwarded it to other potential
participants. The initial sample for the study consisted of 160 participants holding a teaching
position in either a public or a private school in Turkey. The level of their institutions ranged
from preschool to high school. At the time of the data collection, the school authorities in Turkey
had already suspended the face-to face education and initiated online education and the majority
of the study participants indicated that they were frequently involved in online teaching. A small
14
Page 14 of 52
portion of the participants reported that they were rarely or not at all involved in online education
and thus were eliminated from the analyses. Due to normality issues, another four cases were also
removed, which reduced our final sample to 131 participants. Most of the participants in the
study were female (76%) and married (71%). Sixty percent of them were under the age of 40 and
the majority (92%) were working at a public school.
2.2. Measures
Work Performance. Perceived work performance was measured using the “Job
f
oo
Performance Scale” that was developed by Carmeli et al. (2007) and adapted for use with Turkish
samples by Aktaş and Gürkan (2015). The scale consisted of four items, which were rated by the
pr
participants on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = never; 5 = always). A sample item was: “I
e-
produce a high quality of work outcomes.” The internal consistency reliabilities yielded
acceptable values with 0.88 in the Turkish version by Aktaş and Gürkan (2015) and 0.89 in this
Pr
study.
Psychological Resilience. We used “The Brief Resilience Scale” that was developed by
al
Smith et al. (2008) and adapted for use with Turkish samples by Doğan (2015) to measure the
rn
degree to which employees feel they are psychologically resilient. The scale consisted of six
items, which were rated on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly
u
agree). A sample item was as follows: “I usually come through difficult times with little trouble.”
Jo
The internal consistency reliabilities yielded acceptable values with 0.83 in the Turkish version
by Doğan (2015) and 0.81 in this study.
Workplace Support. Workplace support was assessed using eleven items measuring
“supervisor support” and nine items measuring “coworker support.” These were adapted by Giray
and Sahin (2012) who used different supervisory support and coworker support scales in
developing the Turkish versions of perceived workplace support scales. All items in the scales
15
Page 15 of 52
were rated on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). A sample item from
the supervisor support scale was: “My supervisor is willing to listen to my job-related problems.”
A sample item from the coworker support scale was: “My coworkers can be relied upon when
things get tough on my job.” The internal consistency reliabilities for the supervisor support and
coworker support scales yielded acceptable values both in the Turkish version by Giray and
Sahin (2012) (0.94 and 0.90, respectively) and in this study (0.98 and 0.92, respectively). We
summed the scores on the two subscales and formed a single (overall) “workplace support”
f
oo
scale.1 The reliability coefficient for the workplace support scale was 0.96.
Work Engagement. This study used a six-item version of the “Utrecht Work Engagement
pr
Scale” (UWES-6) to measure work engagement levels of employees. The original scale was
e-
developed by Schaufeli et al. (2006), which was adapted to Turkish by Eryılmaz and Doğan
(2012) and Özkalp and Meydan (2015). The shortened version of the scale was developed by
Pr
Güler et al. (2019). The UWES-6 included three subscales: Vigor (2 items); Dedication (2 items);
and Absorption (2 items). All items were rated on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly
al
disagree; 5 = strongly agree). A sample item reads: “I am enthusiastic about my job.” The
rn
internal consistency reliabilities for the vigor, dedication, and absorption subscales yielded
acceptable values both in the Turkish version by Güler et al. (2019) (0.93, 0.94, 0.93,
u
respectively) and in this study (0.95, 0.89, and 0.92, respectively). We summed the scores on the
Jo
three subscales and formed a single (overall) “work engagement” scale. The reliability coefficient
for the work engagement scale was 0.91.
Technological Competency. The “Preservice Teachers’ Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) Competencies Scale” that was developed by Tondeur and his colleagues
1
We also tested our hypotheses for each subscale separately, and the results were identical. Thus, a single and more
parsimonious measure of workplace support was used in the study.
16
Page 16 of 52
(2017) and adapted to Turkish by Alkan and Sarikaya (2018) was used to measure participants’
self-assessment of their own technological competencies. The scale had two sub-scales: 11 items
measuring “ICT competencies to support pupils for ICT use- [ICTC-PU]” and 8 items measuring
“ICT competencies for instructional design- [ICTC-ID].” Because we aimed at examining
teachers’ competencies regarding technology use rather than supporting others to use it, the sub-
scale of ICTC-ID was used in the current study. All items were rated by the participants on a
five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). A sample item was: “I am
f
oo
able to evaluate pupils with the help of ICT.” The internal consistency reliabilities for this sub-
scale yielded acceptable values with 0.82 in the Turkish version by Alkan and Sarikaya (2018)
pr
and 0.91 in this study. e-
Control Variables. This study controlled for employees’ gender, marital status, and age
since the literature suggests that these factors may have an influence on employees’ remote work
Pr
engagement and work performance levels (Feng & Savani, 2020; Makikangas et al., 2022). We
also controlled for caregiver status of employees since this may influence the productivity of
al
employees when working from home. Gender was measured as a dichotomous variable coded as
rn
(0) for female and (1) for male. Participants’ marital status was also assessed as a dichotomous
variable coded as (0) for single and (1) for married. Age was initially measured in four
u
categories: (1) 20-29; (2) 30-39; (3) 40-49; and (4) 50-59. Because categorical variables are not
Jo
directly used in regression models, we created three dummy variables for age and entered them
into the analysis. Caregiver status was measured by asking participants whether they need to take
care of a family member (coded as 1) or not (coded as 0).
2.3. Analyses
Preliminary Analyses. We first analyzed the raw data to check for issues such as missing
values, normality, and multicollinearity. Missing values were replaced using a mean-substitution
17
Page 17 of 52
method and sum scores for each variable were calculated. To screen the data for outliers, we used
Z-score and Mahalonobis distance methods and checked for their correspondence. Based on the
results, we decided to eliminate four cases from the data. We checked for the existence of a
multicollinearity problem by computing the Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) values. Because all
VIF values were lower than the cut-off point of 10, we determined that multicollinearity was not
an issue in this study. Because our variables were collected through a survey, we also checked the
f
possibility of common method bias using the Harman one-factor test (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986).
oo
We found no evidence of a common method bias in our data since the total variance extracted by
one factor was 30%, which is less than the recommended threshold of 50%.
pr
Statistical Analyses. SPSS Process Macro (Model 7 with 5000 bootstrap samples) was
e-
used to test the proposed hypotheses (Hayes, 2017). For probing the interaction, simple slope
analysis (Aiken & West, 1991) and Johnson-Neyman technique (Hayes & Matthes, 2009) were
Pr
applied. To reduce the problem of multicollinearity, both the independent variables and the
moderator were mean-centered.

al
3. Results
rn
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics and correlations among the study variables. In
u
general, participants scored high on work engagement and performance. Pearson correlation
Jo
analysis showed that work performance was positively related to psychological resilience,
technological competency and work engagement, as expected.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Insert Table 1 about here
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2a and 2b provide the results for the direct, moderation, and moderated mediation
hypotheses. Hypothesis 1a predicted that psychological resilience would be positively associated
18
Page 18 of 52
with work engagement. As shown in Table 2a, it was found that psychological resilience had a
positive and significant effect (b = 0.30, 95% CI = [0.1493, 0.4576] on work engagement. That
is, employees reporting greater psychological resilience also reported higher levels of work
engagement during enforced remote working. Thus, Hypothesis 1a was supported. Hypothesis 1b
also proposed a positive relationship between workplace support and work engagement.
However, this relationship was found not to be significant (Table 2a, b = 0.00, 95% CI = [-
f
0.0476, 0.0390]). Hence, Hypothesis 1b was not supported.
oo
------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert Table 2a about here
------------------------------------------------------------------
pr
Hypothesis 2 posited a positive relationship between work engagement and work
e-
performance. In line with this hypothesis, the results indicated that work engagement was
positively associated with work performance (Table 2a, b = 0.17, 95% CI = [0.0473, 0.2913]).
Pr
That is, employees who were more engaged with their work perceived their performance to be
higher. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was supported.

al
Hypothesis 3a stated that technological competency would moderate the positive

rn
relationship between psychological resilience and work engagement, such that the positive
relationship is strengthened as technological competency increases. As seen in Table 2a, the

u
interaction effect of technological competency with psychological resilience on work engagement

Jo
was positive and significant (b = 0.03, 95% CI = [0.0054, 0.0487]. We also conducted simple
slope analysis (Aiken & West, 1991) to examine the nature of the interaction. Specifically, we
computed the slopes using one SD above (high) and one SD below (low) the mean of the
technological competency (moderator) and then plotted the interaction effect. The simple slope
analysis (Figure 2a) confirmed that the positive effect of psychological resilience on work
engagement was stronger for employees whose perceived technological competency was high
19
Page 19 of 52
compared to those whose perceived technological competency was low. In addition, we applied
the Johnson-Neyman technique (Hayes & Matthes, 2009) to further determine the nature of this
moderation effect. This technique allowed us to plot the regions in the range of technological
competency where the effect of psychological resilience on work engagement is statistically
significant or not significant. The results demonstrated that (Figure 2b), psychological resilience
was positively associated with work engagement when the mean centered technological
f
competency exceeded the value of -4.41. Taken together, these findings support Hypothesis 3a.
oo
Similarly, Hypothesis 3b predicted a positive moderating effect of technological competency on
the relationship between workplace support and work engagement. This hypothesis was not
pr
supported as the findings revealed that technological competency did not significantly moderate
e-
the effect of workplace support on work engagement (Table 2a, b = 0.00, 95% CI = [-0.0028,
0.0070]).
Pr
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Insert Figures 2a and 2b about here
-----------------------------------------------------------------
al
Turning to Hypothesis 4a, we proposed that work engagement would mediate the effect of
rn
the interaction between psychological resilience and technological competency on work
performance. Confirming our hypothesis, we found that the 95% bootstrap confidence interval
u
for the index of moderated mediation did not include zero (CI = [0.0004, 0.0111]), indicating a
Jo
significant moderated mediation relationship. That is, the indirect effect of psychological
resilience on work performance through work engagement was contingent on the degree of
employees’ technological competency levels. As shown in Table 2b, the indirect effect was found
to be significant (b = 0.08, 95% CI = [0.0224, 0.1486]) for employees who scored high on
technological competency (+1SD.), while it was nonsignificant (b =0.02, 95% CI = [-0.0205,
0.0651]) for those who scored low on technological competency (-1SD), providing support for
20
Page 20 of 52
Hypothesis 4a. Finally, Hypothesis 4b predicted that work engagement would also mediate the
effect of the interaction between workplace support and technological competency on work
performance. However, we found that the 95% bootstrap confidence interval for the index of
moderated mediation included zero (CI = [-0.0009, 0.0014]), indicating a nonsignificant
moderated mediation relationship. Thus, Hypothesis 4b was not supported.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert Table 2b about here
f
------------------------------------------------------------------
oo
4. Discussion
Based on the theories of JD-R and COR, this study aimed to understand the joint effect of
pr
job resources/personal resources and technological competency on levels of employee work
engagement and performance during a forced shift to remote work caused by COVID-19
e-
pandemic. Results from a sample of 131 teachers provided support for one aspect of the
Pr
motivational process of the JD-R model. Specifically, psychological resilience, but not workplace
support, increased employee performance through high levels of work engagement. In addition,
this relationship was more apparent among people with high technological competency.
al
Consistent with previous findings from traditional office-based working (Kašpárková et

rn
al., 2018), this study found that during enforced remote work, employees who are resilient
u
reported higher engagement, which in turn made them better performers. There is already a wide
Jo
range of evidence regarding the positive effects of psychological resilience on employee work
outcomes (Lee et al., 2021; Shin et al., 2012) but our findings demonstrate that being resilient is
important, even more than job resources, in remote working caused by natural disasters or health
crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
Another important finding of this study has to do with the role of technological
competency. Our results revealed that psychological resilience led to increased work performance
21
Page 21 of 52
through work engagement and that this relationship was stronger among employees with high
levels of technological competency. As we live in the era of technology, it is clear that
employees’ technical skills and savviness are important to their work performance. However,
with the COVID-19 pandemic, these qualities have become a “necessity” for many employees as
they have switched to remote working. Indeed, during the pandemic, healthcare workers were the
ones who used technology most frequently, followed by teachers who were listed as being the
second (Vargo et al., 2021). A recent study shows that teachers’ intention to use technology is
f
oo
highly related to their positive attitudes towards online teaching (De la Rama et al., 2020).
Moreover, teachers’ levels of work stress, emotional overtiredness and depersonalization
pr
decrease, and their sense of personal achievement and level of emotional intelligence increase
e-
with a certain level of technology knowledge during the pandemic (Pozo-Rico et al., 2020). This
is also consistent with research showing that digital self-efficacy lead teachers experience more
Pr
positive emotions (Moreira-Fontan, 2019). Therefore, drawing on the JD-R and COR theories,
we expected that when employees possess a high level of technological competency, the positive
al
effects of job/personal resources on work engagement would be accelerated due to the synergistic
rn
effects of resources. In other words, we predicted that technological competency, as a personal
resource, would increase the positive impacts of workplace support and resilience on work
u
engagement. Our findings confirmed this prediction by showing that the positive effect of
Jo
psychological resilience on work engagement was more apparent for employees with high
technological competency. However, we did not find support for the hypothesized interaction
effect of workplace support and technological competency on work engagement and subsequent
work performance.
The nonsignificant effect of social support on work engagement and performance in this
study may have resulted from the cultural or contextual characteristics of our sample. Regarding
22
Page 22 of 52
cultural characteristics, research in Turkey shows that job resources (e.g., autonomy, supervisory
or colleague support) decrease the level of burnout (Babakus et al., 2008) while increasing the
level of work engagement (Altunel et al., 2015; Turunç & Celik, 2010). These results are parallel
to those reported in the JD-R literature. Consequently, we cannot claim that the nonsignificant
effect of social support in our study is due to Turkish culture. In terms of contextual
characteristics, research demonstrates that social support improves well-being only when its type
and amount match people’s needs (Buunk et al., 1993; Dakof & Taylor, 1990; Jung, 1997).
f
oo
During natural disasters or public health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, different types
of social support might be effective at promoting workers’ well-being and performance. For
pr
example, Sanchez and her colleagues (1995) showed that tangible support (e.g., providing food,
e-
transportation) was more effective in reducing stress among employees after a natural disaster
than was emotional support. Relatedly, another study on employees’ well-being in New Zealand
Pr
showed that during the pandemic, employees mainly asked for assistance with individualized
tools and equipment (i.e., computers) and with training and personnel support (Malinen et al.,
al
2020). It is also important to note that the participants in our sample had limited face-to-face
rn
interaction with their managers and coworkers as they were working from home. Research
suggests that social distancing as a precaution for contagious disorders may harm the quality of
u
social support people receive (Tuzovic & Kabadayi, 2020). Thus, it is possible that the effect of
Jo
social support on work-related outcomes may become weaker in such circumstances.
It is also worth noting that none of the control variables in our study (i.e., gender, age,
marital status, caregiver status) has a significant impact on the proposed relationships. This is not
surprising in that previous studies on remote working reveal conflicting findings regarding the
effect of demographic variables. Although there is some research showing that remote work
outcomes differ based on employee demography (Feng & Savani, 2020; Mäkikangas et al.,
23
Page 23 of 52
2022), there also exists research finding no real differences in terms of demographic variables
(Sutarto et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2021).
Overall, this study contributes to the limited research that examines employees’ work
experiences during the enforced remote working. Our findings expand our knowledge in this area
by demonstrating that, personal resources may play a more important role than job resources
when employees work from home due to the pandemic. Furthermore, our study offers new
f
insights into the literature on the motivational process of the JD-R by examining the moderating
oo
effect of technological competency as a personal resource. In doing so, we add to the recent body
of literature that focuses on studying the moderators of the relationship between job/personal
pr
resources and work outcomes. e-
4.1. Implications for Practice
The findings of this study have several implications for practice. First, our research
Pr
underscores the notion that employee resilience plays an important role in increasing job
engagement and performance. Even though our study focuses on the effects of psychological
al
resilience at the workplace during the enforced remote work caused by the pandemic,
rn
organizations worldwide need and seek resilient employees more than ever because of the
ongoing global recession in the last decade. This economic problem around the world have
u
resulted in higher workloads and pressures at work and consequently has led to higher work-
Jo
related stress, absentee rates and financial problems at both individual and organization level
(Houdmont et al., 2012; Robertson et al., 2015). Therefore, developing and maintaining a
resilient mindset at work has become more critical than ever. In line with this, we recommend
Human Resource (HR) practitioners to consider including resilience in the screening tool when
they hire new employees, especially for highly demanding jobs (e.g., information technology
sector) (Syrek et al., 2013). However, even if employees are not naturally resilient, they can be
24
Page 24 of 52
encouraged to develop resiliency skills and be provided opportunities to do so. According to the
review by Aguinis and Kraiger (2009), job training provides workers new skills and knowledge,
improves their personal strengths (e.g., self- efficacy, self-regulation) and enhances their
adaptation to new environments. Relatedly, resilience training was found to be associated with
higher performance and enhanced psychosocial functioning (Robertson et al., 2015). Therefore,
we suggest HR professionals to provide work-based interventions through which resilience in the
f
workplace can be enhanced. Furthermore, in the education sector, specifically for teachers,
oo
research shows that positive emotions increase the level of psychological resilience (Chou et al.,
2016). Thus, to enhance psychological resilience, we also recommend that teachers adapt
pr
behaviors that increase their positive emotions (e.g., gratitude, savoring, building positive
e-
relationships, exercising mindfulness and helping others) (Niedenthal & Ric, 2017).
Second, our results emphasize the importance of technological competency in increasing

Pr
the positive effect of personal resources on job engagement. Thus, another implication of this
research is that providing training activities aimed at promoting employee learning in the domain
al
of online work tools can accelerate the effect of resources on work outcomes. This is especially
rn
critical during the pandemic as working from home is required for many employees including
teachers, which can be only done with technology. Particularly for the education sector from
u
which we collected the data for this study, Onyema and his colleagues (2020) report that
Jo
coronavirus pandemic negatively affected the quality of education via decreased access to
education and research facilities. In addition to technical problems such as network and power
problems, poor technological competency harmed the quality of education. Their study
underlines “the need for all educational institutions, educators, and learners to adopt technology,
and improve their digital skills in line with the emerging global trends and realities in education”
(p.108). Similarly, recent studies examining the effects of COVID-19 on teaching and education
25
Page 25 of 52
revealed a necessity for the improvement of technological competency among teachers and the
development of technology based instructional strategies and alternative technology-based course
assessments, worldwide (König et al., 2020; Moorhouse, 2020; Quezada et al., 2020). Therefore,
we suggest school administrators provide training through which teachers who have limited
technological knowledge or are reluctant to use technology, can become motivated to improve
their technological skills. Such training can also lead to an enhanced feeling of self-efficacy and
thereby an increase in teachers’ technological competency levels. As a result, they may positively
f
oo
approach online teaching (De la Rama et al., 2020), their job performance and satisfaction may
increase and their intention to leave may decrease as reported by Vaziri et al. (2020). It is also
pr
important to note that before providing the training, organizations should make a need assessment
e-
by focusing on the characteristics of their employees (e.g., personality, training motivation) and
organization. For example, elementary school teachers’ technology use was found to be highly
Pr
affected by their skills according to a study completed with 1040 teachers from 81 schools
(Miranda & Russell, 2012). Moreover, different school levels (e.g., high vs. primary school) may
al
require different levels of technological competency to deliver knowledge to their students.

rn
Accordingly, such training can be determined based on teachers’ skills and their school levels. By
this way, organizations can select the most appropriate kind of training and the best method to
u
deliver it. In addition, training workers with specific strengths (e.g., high training motivation,
Jo
self-efficacy, openness to experience) can facilitate the process and benefit the system at both
individual (e.g., better performance) and organizational level (e.g., lower expenses) (Aguinis &
Kraiger, 2009).
Finally, our findings may imply that during the enforced remote working, perceived
support from managers and coworkers may not be sufficient for making employees mentally
connect to their tasks. Thus, it is important that leaders identify other engagement-enhancing
26
Page 26 of 52
activities, such as providing performance feedback or job autonomy. Through performance
feedback, leaders communicate their expectations to employees, which in turn reduces job
ambiguity and increases employees’ understanding of work goals (Lee et al., 2019). The existing
literature indicates a positive effect of performance feedback on work engagement (Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli et al., 2009). Considering that the pandemic resulted in changes and
uncertainties in the work functions, providing sufficient feedback would play a pivotal role in
f
enhancing employee engagement. Similarly, job autonomy is another tool which can be used to
oo
increase employee engagement. Job autonomy refers to “the degree to which the job provides
substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the employee in scheduling the work and in
pr
determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out (Hackman & Oldham, 1975, p.162).
e-
Studies show a positive association between autonomy and work engagement (Schaufeli et al.,
2009; Van Dorssen-Boog et al., 2020), and underline the important role of job autonomy in job
Pr
satisfaction independent of culture (Au & Cheng, 2014; Bedemariam & Ramos, 2021). However,
we believe autonomy would be more critical today as employees need more flexibility and
al
discretion in dealing with the conditions caused by the pandemic. Thus, we also suggest that
rn
leaders who seek ways to increase employees’ work engagement, and eventually their
performance, should consider providing them a sense of control over their work. This being said,
u
it is also important to note that recommended practices here may not be good fit for every
Jo
employee and organization. Thus, in promoting employee engagement, we suggest leaders to
consider differentiated strategies instead of “one-size fits-all” approach (Eblie Trudel et al., 2021,
p.5).
To sum up, we can categorize the preventions suggested above into two levels as primary
(i.e., organization-based) and secondary (i.e., individual-based). At primary level, organizations
can make regular organization- and employee-based need assessments, and provide employees
27
Page 27 of 52
trainings on resilience, remote working, and technology. At secondary level, employees can adapt
life styles that may support resilience (i.e., exercising mindfulness, helping others) and
technological competency (i.e., attending technology related trainings and using technology more
as a part of their work). Together, these interventions can benefit both the organizations and
employees via higher performance and production.
4.2. Limitations and Future Directions
f
As with any study, the present research has some limitations. First, in the literature,
oo
employee performance has been assessed via different methods. While some studies have
focused on using objective performance measures, others have focused on subjective
pr
performance evaluations by employees, managers, or coworkers. In this study, we assessed
e-
teacher performance based on participants’ self-evaluations. Similarly, all other variables in our
research were measured via self-report techniques. To develop a more complete picture of
Pr
employee performance and its antecedents during natural disasters such as the pandemic,
additional studies using different methods (i.e., observations, others’ report, experimental design)
al
are needed.
rn
Furthermore, even though the models with workplace support did not reveal significant
results in this study, we cannot conclude that social support has no effect on work outcomes
u
during a global health crisis. In the current research, we examined the social support that people
Jo
feel they receive from their managers and colleagues. However, employees in our sample were
working remotely and they had limited face-to-face interaction with their managers and
coworkers. It may be that social support in close relationships is more critical than work-related
social support during the enforced remote working. Indeed, reviewing the social support
literature, a recent study points to the fact that the effects of social support may change depending
upon the source of support (Jolly et al., 2021). Moreover, there is also evidence showing that not
28
Page 28 of 52
all sources of support perceived beneficial by teachers during a pandemic (Sokal et al., 2020a).
These suggest other possible avenues for future research.
Another limitation of this work has to do with the sample size. The number of participants
in our study were relatively small which may reduce the power to detect statistically significant
effects. Thus, we recommend that future studies collect data from a larger number of
respondents. Finally, we also acknowledge that our study does not allow to draw conclusions
f
regarding causality due to its cross-sectional nature. That is, in parallel to previous two-wave
oo
studies, one can argue a reciprocal link between work engagement and job or personal resources
(Llorens et al., 2007; Schaufeli et al., 2009; Xanthopoulou et al., 2009b). As indicated by
pr
Schaufeli and Taris (2014, p.49), this may suggest “the existence of a gain cycle – that is, the
e-
(perceived) availability of resources fosters engagement, which in turn has a positive impact on
(either the presence or the perception of) resources, etc.” However, it is also important to note
Pr
that a recent three-wave study did not support these findings (Barbier et al., 2013). In other
words, any change in job and personal resources predicted work engagement in the future, but not
al
vice versa. In conclusion, even though a reciprocal relationship between work engagement and
rn
job or personal resources sounds reasonable, the existent literature fails to sufficiently test and
support this argument. Thus, more research with longitudinal study design is needed to determine
u
the cause-effect relationship between the variables in our study.

Jo
5. Conclusion
Although a number of studies in the literature examined employees’ remote work
experiences, the existing research lacks to cover the experiences related to enforced remote
working. Our study expands this knowledge through an investigation of the antecedents and
moderators of employee performance during the enforced remote work caused by COVID-19
pandemic. Specifically, integrating the theories of JD-R and COR, this study examines the effects
29
Page 29 of 52
of resilience and workplace support on work engagement, which in turn have an impact on work
performance. Moreover, the present research studies the role of technological competency as a
personal resource which moderates the relationship between resilience/workplace support and
engagement. Although personal resources have been incorporated into the JD-R model in various
ways, there is still lack of research examining the synergetic effects of personal resources and
other personal/job resources on work outcomes. Thus, our study advances the theoretical and
f
empirical understanding of the role of personal resources in the motivational process of the JD-R
oo
model, as well.
Specifically, the results obtained in this research highlight the importance of employee
pr
technological competency as a personal resource that increases the positive effect of
e-
psychological resilience on work performance through work engagement. The findings
demonstrate that different resources have synergetic effects such that when employees have
Pr
positive beliefs regarding their technological competencies, their resilience increases, and thus
they would have more room to concentrate on their jobs, and eventually perform better.
al
Considering that the COVID-19 pandemic has made many employees dependent on the
rn
technology as a result of working remotely, our results suggest the need for boosting employees’
self-confidence in technology use. Thus, we suggest organizations to provide support in

u
improving employees’ digital skills through which employees can have higher self-efficacy in
Jo
technology use, and eventually have higher work engagement and performance. Although this
study focused on a sample of teachers, we hope that the results presented here can become a
reference for other occupations, as well.
30
Page 30 of 52
References
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451-474.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
London: Sage.
Airila, A., Hakanen, J. J., Schaufeli, W. B., Luukkonen, R., Punakallio, A., & Lusa, S. (2014).
f
Are job and personal resources associated with work ability 10 years later? The mediating
oo
role of work engagement. Work & Stress, 28(1), 87-105.
Aktaş, H., & Gürkan, G. Ç. (2015). İş-aile ve aile-iş çatışması ile bireysel performans
pr
etkileşiminde mesleki bağlılığın aracı rolü: Hemşireler üzerinde bir araştırma. Doğuş
e-
Üniversitesi Dergisi, 16(2), 139-154.
Alkan, M. F., & Sarıkaya, E. E. (2018). Adaptation of preservice teachers’ information and
Pr
communication technology competencies scale into Turkish culture. Bartın Üniversitesi
Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 665-691.

al
Altunel, M. C., Kocak, O. E., & Cankir, B. (2015). The effect of job resources on work
rn
engagement: A study on academicians in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory &
Practice, 15(2), 409-417.

u
Au, K., & Cheung, M. W. (2004). Intra-cultural variation and job autonomy in 42
Jo
countries. Organization Studies, 25(8), 1339-1362.
Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can positive employees help positive
organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes
and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(1), 48-70.
31
Page 31 of 52
Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Karatepe, O. M. (2008). The effects of job demands, job resources and
intrinsic motivation on emotional exhaustion and turnover intentions: A study in the
Turkish hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration,
9(4), 384-404.
Baker, C. N., Peele, H., Daniels, M., Saybe, M., Whalen, K., Overstreet, S., & The New Orleans,
T. I. S. L. C. (2021). The experience of COVID-19 and its impact on teachers’ mental
f
health, coping, and teaching. School Psychology Review, 1-14.
oo
Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 20(4), 265-269.
pr
Bakker, A. B., & Bal, M. P. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among
e-
starting teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(1), 189-
206.
Pr
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands–resources model: State of the art.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.

al
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career
rn
Development International.13(3). 209-223.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands-resources theory: Taking stock and looking
u
forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273-285.

Jo
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The
JD–R approach. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 1, 389-411.
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands‐ resources model
to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83-104.
32
Page 32 of 52
Bakker, A. B., Van Emmerik, H., & Van Riet, P. (2008). How job demands, resources, and
burnout predict objective performance: A constructive replication. Anxiety, Stress, and
Coping, 21, 309–324.
Bakker, A.B., & Van Wingerden, J. (2021). Do personal resources and strengths use increase
work engagement? The effects of a training intervention. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 26, 20-30.
f
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
oo
Barbier, M., Hansez, I., Chmiel, N., & Demerouti, E. (2013). Performance expectations, personal
resources, and job resources: How do they predict work engagement? European Journal
pr
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(6), 750-762.
e-
Becker, W. J., Belkin, L. Y., Tuskey, S. E., & Conroy, S. A. (2022). Surviving remotely: How
job control and loneliness during a forced shift to remote work impacted employee work
Pr
behaviors and well‐ being. Human Resource Management. 61, 449-464.
Bedemariam, R., & Ramos, J. (2021). Over-education and job satisfaction: The role of job
al
insecurity and career enhancing strategies. European Review of Applied

rn
Psychology, 71(3), 1-9.
Blaique, L., Ismail, H. N., & Aldabbas, H. (2022). Organizational learning, resilience and
u
psychological empowerment as antecedents of work engagement during COVID-

Jo
19. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 1741.
Brod, С. (1984). Technostress: The Human Cost of Computer Revolution, Reading, Addison-
Wesley.
Buunk, B. P., Doosje, B. J., Jans, L. G., & Hopstaken, L. E. (1993). Perceived reciprocity, social
support, and stress at work: The role of exchange and communal orientation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 801.

33
Page 33 of 52
Burić, I., Slišković, A., & Sorić, I. (2020). Teachers’ emotions and self-efficacy: A test of
reciprocal relations. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-14.
Caesens, G., & Stinglhamber, F. (2014). The relationship between perceived organizational
support and work engagement: The role of self-efficacy and its outcomes. European
Review of Applied Psychology, 64(5), 259-267.
Carmeli, A., Gilat, G., & Waldman, D. A. (2007). The role of perceived organizational
f
performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. Journal of
oo
Management Studies, 44(6), 972-992.
Carpini, J. A., Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2017). A look back and a leap forward: A review
pr
and synthesis of the individual work performance literature. Academy of Management
e-
Annals, 11(2), 825-885.
Charalampous, M., Grant, C. A., Tramontano, C., & Michailidis, E. (2019). Systematically
Pr
reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: A multidimensional
approach. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(1), 51-73.

al
Chou, M. J., Lee, H. M., & Wu, H. T. (2016). Emotion, psychological resilience and work stress:
rn
A study among preschool teachers. European Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 8-
15.
u
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative
Jo
review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel
Psychology, 64(1), 89-136.
Dakof, G. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1990). Victims' perceptions of social support: What is helpful
from whom?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(1), 80-89.
34
Page 34 of 52
De Clercq, D. (2019). Getting creative with resources: How resilience, task interdependence, and
emotion sharing mitigate the damage of employee role ambiguity. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 55(3), 369-391.
De la Rama, J., Sabasales, M., Antonio, A., Ricohermoso, C., Torres, J., Devanadera, A., &
Alieto, E. (2020). Virtual teaching as the 'new norm’: Analyzing science teachers’ attitude
toward online teaching, technological competence and access. International Journal of
f
Advanced Science and Technology, 29(7), 12705-12715.
oo
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-
resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499-512.
pr
Doğan, T. (2015). Kısa psikolojik sağlamlık ölçeği’nin Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve
e-
güvenirlik çalışması. The Journal of Happiness & Well-Being, 3(1), 93-102.
Eblie Trudel, L. G., Sokal, L. J., & Babb, J. C. (2021). Planning for Teacher Recovery from the
Pr
COVID-19 Pandemic: Adaptive Regulation to Promote Resilience. Interdisciplinary
Education and Psychology. 3(1), 1-8.

al
Eddleston, K. A., & Mulki, J. (2017). Toward understanding remote workers’ management of
rn
work–family boundaries: The complexity of workplace embeddedness. Group &
Organization Management, 42(3), 346-387.

u
Eryılmaz, E. & Doğan, T. (2012). İş yaşamında öznel iyi oluş: Utrecht işe bağlılık ölçeğinin
Jo
psikometrik niteliklerinin incelenmesi, Klinik Psikiyatri, 15, 49-55.
Feng, Z., & Savani, K. (2020). COVID-19 created a gender gap in perceived work productivity
and job satisfaction: Implications for dual-career parents working from home. Gender in
Management, 35(7/8), 719–736.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-
and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226.

35
Page 35 of 52
Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward
emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13(2), 172-175.
Gajendran, R. S., Harrison, D. A., & Delaney‐ Klinger, K. (2015). Are telecommuters remotely
good citizens? Unpacking telecommuting's effects on performance via i‐ deals and job
resources. Personnel Psychology, 68(2), 353-393.
Giray, M. D., & Sahin, D. N. (2012). Algılanan örgütsel, yönetici ve çalısma arkadasları desteği
f
ölçekleri: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalismasi. Türk Psikoloji Yazilari, 15(30), 1-9.
oo
Güler, M., Çetin, F., & Basim, H. N. (2019). İşe tutulma ölçeği çok kısa versiyonu (UWES-3)
geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması: Alternatif bir versiyon (UWES-6) önerisi. İş ve İnsan
pr
Dergisi, 6(2), 189-197. e-
Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159–170.

Pr
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among
teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43(6), 495-513.

al
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A

rn
regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS
u
and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods,
Jo
41(3), 924–936.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing
stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524.
Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources
in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103-128.

36
Page 36 of 52
Houdmont, J., Kerr, R., & Addley, K. (2012). Psychosocial factors and economic recession: The
Stormont Study. Occupational Medicine, 62(2), 98-104.
Jena, R. K. (2015). Technostress in ICT enabled collaborative learning environment: An
empirical study among Indian academician. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1116-
1123.
Jolly, Phillip M, Kong, Dejun Tony, & Kim, Kyoung Yong. (2021). Social support at work: An
f
integrative review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(2), 229–251.
oo
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem,
generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction
pr
and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80-92.
e-
Jung, J. (1997). Balance and Source of Social Support in Relation to Weil-Being. The Journal of
General Psychology, 124(1), 77-90.

Pr
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.

al
Kašpárková, L., Vaculík, M., Procházka, J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2018). Why resilient workers
rn
perform better: The roles of job satisfaction and work engagement. Journal of Workplace
Behavioral Health, 33(1), 43-62.

u
Kay, R. H. (2008). Exploring the relationship between emotions and the acquisition of computer
Jo
knowledge. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1269-1283.
King, R. B., Pitliya, R. J., & Datu, J. A. (2020). Psychological capital drives optimal engagement
via positive emotions in work and school contexts. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 23(4), 457-468.
37
Page 37 of 52
König, J., Jäger-Biela, D. J., & Glutsch, N. (2020). Adapting to online teaching during COVID-
19 school closure: teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career
teachers in Germany. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 608-622.
Kramer, A., & Kramer, K. Z. (2020). The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
occupational status, work from home, and occupational mobility. Journal of Vocational
Behavior. 119, 1-4.
f
Lee, M. C. C., Idris, M. A., & Tuckey, M. (2019). Supervisory coaching and performance
oo
feedback as mediators of the relationships between leadership styles, work engagement,
and turnover intention. Human Resource Development International, 22(3), 257-282.
pr
Lee, Y. H., Richards, K. A. R., & Washburn, N. (2021). Mindfulness, resilience, emotional
e-
exhaustion, and turnover intention in secondary physical education teaching. European
Review of Applied Psychology, 71(6), 1-10.

Pr
Llorens, S., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2007). Does a positive spiral of
resources, efficacy beliefs and engagement exist? Computers in Human Behavior, 23,
al
825–841.
rn
Luszczynska, A., Gutiérrez-Doña, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various
domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of

u
Psychology, 40(2), 80–89.

Jo
Mäkikangas, A., Juutinen, S., Mäkiniemi, J. P., Sjöblom, K., & Oksanen, A. (2022). Work
engagement and its antecedents in remote work: A person-centered view. Work & Stress,
1-25.
Malinen, S. K., Wong, J. H. K., & Näswall, K. (2020). Effective workplace strategies to support
employee wellbeing during a pandemic. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations,
45(2).17-32.
38
Page 38 of 52
Malkoç, A., & Yalçın, İ. (2015). Relationships among resilience, social support, coping, and
psychological well-being among university students. Turkish Psychological Counseling
and Guidance Journal, 5(43). 35-43.
Meneghel, I., Borgogni, L., Miraglia, M., Salanova, M., & Martinez, I. M. (2016). From social
context and resilience to performance through job satisfaction: A multilevel study over
time. Human Relations, 69(11), 2047-2067.
f
Miranda, H. P., & Russell, M. (2012). Understanding factors associated with teacher‐ directed
oo
student use of technology in elementary classrooms: A structural equation modeling
approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 652-666.
pr
Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course
e-
‘forced’online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4),
609-611.
Pr
Moreira-Fontán, E., García-Señorán, M., Conde-Rodríguez, Á., & González, A. (2019). Teachers'
ICT-related self-efficacy, job resources, and positive emotions: Their structural relations
al
with autonomous motivation and work engagement. Computers & Education, 134, 63-77.
rn
Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be
distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475-

u
480.
Jo
Neal, A., Yeo, G., Koy, A., & Xiao, T. (2012). Predicting the form and direction of work role
performance from the Big 5 model of personality traits. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 33(2), 175-192.
Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 392-423.
Niedenthal, P. M., & Ric, F. (2017). Psychology of Emotion. Psychology Press.

39
Page 39 of 52
Nyberg, A. J., Shaw, J. D., & Zhu, J. (2021). The people still make the (remote work-) place:
Lessons from a pandemic. Journal of Management, 47(8), 1967-1976.
Ojo, A. O., Fawehinmi, O., & Yusliza, M. Y. (2021). Examining the predictors of resilience and
work engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 13(5), 1-18.
Onyema, E. M., Eucheria, N. C., Obafemi, F. A., Sen, S., Atonye, F. G., Sharma, A., & Alsayed,
A. O. (2020). Impact of Coronavirus pandemic on education. Journal of Education and
f
Practice, 11(13), 108-121.
oo
Othman, N., Ghazali, Z., & Ahmad, S. A. (2013). Resilience and work engagement: A stitch to
nursing care quality. Journal of Global Management, 6(1), 40-48.
pr
Özkalp, E. & Meydan, B. (2015). Schaufeli ve Bakker tarafından geliştirilmiş olan işe angaje
e-
olma ölçeğinin Türkçe’de güvenilirlik ve geçerliliğinin analizi, İş, Güç Endüstri İlişkileri
ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 17(3), 4-19.

Pr
Paek, S., Schuckert, M., Kim, T. T., & Lee, G. (2015). Why is hospitality employees’
psychological capital important? The effects of psychological capital on work

al
engagement and employee morale. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 50,

rn
9-26.
Perry, S. J., Rubino, C., & Hunter, E. M. (2018). Stress in remote work: two studies testing the
u
Demand-Control-Person model. European Journal of Work and Organizational

Jo
Psychology, 27(5), 577-593.
Pietrzak, R. H., Johnson, D. C., Goldstein, M. B., Malley, J. C., & Southwick, S. M. (2009).
Psychological resilience and post deployment social support protect against traumatic
stress and depressive symptoms in soldiers returning from Operations Enduring Freedom
and Iraqi Freedom. Depression and Anxiety, 26(8), 745-751.
40
Page 40 of 52
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and
prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.
Pozo-Rico, T., Gilar-Corbí, R., Izquierdo, A., & Castejón, J. L. (2020). Teacher training can
make a difference: Tools to overcome the impact of covid-19 on primary schools. An
experimental study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 17, 1-22.
f
Quezada, R. L., Talbot, C., & Quezada-Parker, K. B. (2020). From bricks and mortar to remote
oo
teaching: A teacher education program‘s response to COVID-19. Journal of Education
for Teaching, 46(4), 472-483.
pr
Ragu-Nathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragu-Nathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The consequences of
e-
technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and empirical
validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417-433.

Pr
Ramos-Villagrasa, P. J., Barrada, J. R., Fernández-del-Río, E., & Koopmans, L. (2019).
Assessing job performance using brief self-report scales: The case of the individual work
al
performance questionnaire. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35(3), 195-

rn
205.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on
u
job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.

Jo
Robertson, I. T., Cooper, C. L., Sarkar, M., & Curran, T. (2015). Resilience training in the
workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 88(3), 533-562.
Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and
counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing
approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 66.

41
Page 41 of 52
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in
motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Publications.
Salmela-Aro, K., & Upadyaya, K. (2018). Role of demands-resources in work engagement and
burnout in different career stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 108, 190-200.
Sanchez, J. I., Korbin, W. P., & Viscarra, D. M. (1995). Corporate support in the aftermath of a
natural disaster: Effects on employee strains. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2),
f
504-521.
oo
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with
burnout and engagement: A multi‐ sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
pr
25(3), 293-315. e-
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement
with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological

Pr
Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and
al
resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of

rn
Organizational Behavior, 30, 893–917.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2014). A critical review of the job demands-resources model:
u
Implications for improving work and health. Bridging Occupational, Organizational and
Jo
Public Health, 43-68.
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress
and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology: An International Review. 57, 152–
171.
42
Page 42 of 52
Shamsi, M., Iakovleva, T., Olsen, E., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2021). Employees’ work-related well-
being during COVID-19 pandemic: An integrated perspective of technology acceptance
model and JD-R theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 18(22), 1-22.
Shin, J., Taylor, M. S., & Seo, M. G. (2012). Resources for change: The relationships of
organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees' attitudes and
f
behaviors toward organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 727-
oo
748.
Smith, B. W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P., & Bernard, J. (2008). The brief
pr
resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. International Journal of Behavioral
e-
Medicine, 15(3), 194-200.
Sokal, L. J., Trudel, L. G. E., & Babb, J. C. (2020a). Supporting teachers in times of change: The
Pr
job demands-resources model and teacher burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic.
International Journal of Contemporary Education. 3(2), 67-74.

al
Sokal, L., Trudel, L. E., & Babb, J. (2020b). Canadian teachers’ attitudes toward change,
rn
efficacy, and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of
Educational Research Open, 1, 1-8.

u
Staples, D. S., Hulland, J. S., & Higgins, C. A. (1999). A self-efficacy theory explanation for the
Jo
management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6),
758-776.
Sutarto, A. P., Wardaningsih, S., & Putri, W. H. (2022). Factors and challenges influencing
work‐ related outcomes of the enforced work from home during the COVID‐ 19
pandemic: Preliminary evidence from Indonesia. Global Business and Organizational
Excellence. 41, 14-28.

43
Page 43 of 52
Sweetman, D., & Luthans, F. (2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital
and work engagement. Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and
research, 54-68.
Syrek, C. J., Apostel, E., & Antoni, C. H. (2013). Stress in highly demanding IT jobs:
Transformational leadership moderates the impact of time pressure on exhaustion and
work–life balance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18(3), 252-261.
f
Tarafdar, M., Tu, Q., Ragu-Nathan, T. S., & Ragu-Nathan, B. S. (2011). Crossing to the dark
oo
side: examining creators, outcomes, and inhibitors of technostress. Communications of the
ACM, 54(9), 113-120.
pr
Taris, T. W., Leisink, P. L., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2017). Applying occupational health theories to
e-
educator stress: Contribution of the job demands-resources model. Educator Stress, 237-
259.
Pr
Taylor, S. E. (2011). Social support: A review. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of
Health Psychology (pp. 189–214). Oxford University Press.

al
Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Pynoo, B., Braak, J. v., Fraeyman, N., & Erstad, O. (2017). Developing
rn
a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers’ ICT competencies: Meeting the
demands of the 21st century. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 462–472.
u
Toscano, F., & Zappalà, S. (2020). Social isolation and stress as predictors of productivity
Jo
perception and remote work satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of
concern about the virus in a moderated double mediation. Sustainability, 12(23), 1-14.
Truzoli, R., Pirola, V., & Conte, S. (2021). The impact of risk and protective factors on online
teaching experience in high school Italian teachers during the COVID‐ 19
pandemic. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37, 940-952.
44
Page 44 of 52
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to
bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 86(2), 320-333.
Turunç, Ö., & Çelik, M. (2010). Çalışanların algıladıkları örgütsel destek ve iş stresinin örgütsel
özdeşleşme ve iş performansına etkisi. Journal of Management & Economics, 17(2). 183-
206.
f
Tuzovic, S., & Kabadayi, S. (2020). The influence of social distancing on employee well-being:
oo
A conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 32(2).
145-160.
pr
Vancouver, J. B., & Purl, J. D. (2017). A computational model of self-efficacy’s various effects
e-
on performance: Moving the debate forward. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(4), 599-
616.
Pr
Van den Broeck, A., Van Ruysseveldt, J., Smulders, P., & De Witte, H. (2011). Does an intrinsic
work value orientation strengthen the impact of job resources? A perspective from the Job
al
Demands–Resources Model. European Journal of Work and Organizational

rn
Psychology, 20(5), 581-609.
Van den Heuvel, M., Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2010). Personal
u
resources and work engagement in the face of change. In Houdmont, J., & Leka, S.
Jo
(Eds.). Contemporary Occupational Health Psychology, Volume 1: Global Perspectives
on Research and Practice (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons.
Van Dorssen-Boog, P., de Jong, J., Veld, M., & Van Vuuren, T. (2020). Self-leadership among
healthcare workers: A mediator for the effects of job autonomy on work engagement and
health. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-13.
45
Page 45 of 52
Vargo, D., Zhu, L., Benwell, B., & Yan, Z. (2021). Digital technology use during COVID‐ 19
pandemic: A rapid review. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 3(1), 13-24.
Vaziri, H., Casper, W. J., Wayne, J. H., & Matthews, R. A. (2020). Changes to the work–family
interface during the COVID-19 pandemic: Examining predictors and implications using
latent transition analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1073-1087.
Wang, Z., Li, C., & Li, X. (2017). Resilience, leadership and work engagement: The mediating
f
role of positive affect. Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 699-708.
oo
Wang, B., Liu, Y., Qian, J., & Parker, S. K. (2021). Achieving effective remote working during
the COVID‐ 19 pandemic: A work design perspective. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 16-59.
pr
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007a). The role of
e-
personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress
Management, 14(2), 121-141.

Pr
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009a). Work engagement
and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of
al
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 183–200.

rn
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009b). Reciprocal
relationships between job resources, personal resources, and work engagement. Journal of
u
Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 235-244.

Jo
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Dollard, M. F., Demerouti, E., Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W.,
& Schreurs, P. J. (2007b). When do job demands particularly predict burnout? The
moderating role of job resources. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 22(8), 766-786.
46
Page 46 of 52
Figure 1. Hypothesized Model
H3a & H3b

Technological
Competency
Psychological
Resilience
H1a & H1b Work Work
f
Workplace Support
Engagement
H4a & H4b Performance
oo
H2
pr
e-
Pr
al
u rn
Jo
47
Page 47 of 52
Figure 2a. Technological Competency as a Moderator of the Relationship between Psychological

Resilience and Work Engagement
Work Engagement
f
oo
pr
e-
Pr
Low Psychological High Psychological
Resilience Resilience
Moderator: Technological Competency

ּ ּ medium
al
low -------
high
u rn
Jo
48
Page 48 of 52
Figure 2b. The Johnson-Neyman Graph for the Conditional effect of Psychological Resilience on
Work Engagement at values of Technological Competency
Conditional Effect
f
oo
pr
e-
Pr
Technological Competency
effect ּ ּ LLCI -----

al
ULCI
u rn
Jo
49
Page 49 of 52
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics and Correlations (n=131)
Variable Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Gender 0.24 0.43
2. Age1d 0.15 0.36 -.04
3. Age2d 0.46 0.50 -.01
-
.39**
4. Age3d 0.33 0.47 .11 - -
.30** .64**
5. Marital 0.71 0.46 .04 -.05
Status -.20* .23**
6. Caregiver 0.37 0.48 -.05 .13 .01
f
Status -.10 .42**
oo
7. Psych. 20.42 4.15 - -.07 -.07 .02
Resilience .21* -.01 .09
8. 74.02 15.08 .12 .08 .05 -.01 -.09 .00
Workplace .00
pr
Support
9. Techn. 29.47 6.08 .15 .06 -.16 .02 - .08
Competency .13 .01 .23**
10. Work 25.30 3.67 .02
e-
-.07 .08 -.09 .01 .11
Engagement -.07 .05 .35**
11. Work 17.79 2.44 -.08 -.03 -.09 .07 .19* .04
Pr
Performance .03 .02 .49** .26**
Notes: ** p < .01; * p < .05
Minimum/maximum scores for psych. resilience: 6-30; workplace support: 20-100; techn.
competency: 8-40; work engagement: 6-30;
al
work performance: 4-20.

u rn
Jo
50
Page 50 of 52
Table 2a: Direct and Moderated Effects (n=131)

Outcome: Work Engagement
Variable
B se t p LLCI ULCI
Psychological Resilience
0.303 0.077 3.897 0.000 0.1493 0.4576
Technological Competency x Psychological Resilience 0.027
0.011 2.469 0.014 0.0054 0.0487
Workplace Support -
0.004 0.021 -0.195 0.845 -0.0476 0.0390
Technological Competency x Workplace Support 0.002
0.002 0.834 0.405 -0.0028 0.0070
f
Outcome: Work Performance
oo
Variable
B se t p LLCI ULCI
Psychological Resilience
pr
0.024 0.057 0.428 0.669 -0.0891 0.1382
Workplace Support
0.014 0.014 0.986 0.326 -0.0142 0.0423
Work Engagement
e-
0.169 0.061 2.746 0.006 0.0473 0.2913
Note: controlling for age, gender, marital status, and caregiver status.
Pr
LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval.
al
u rn
Jo
51
Page 51 of 52
Table 2b: Conditional Indirect Effect of Psychological Resilience on Work Performance at

Values of Technological Competency (n=131)
B se LLCI ULCI
Low level of Technological Competency
0.023 0.021 -0.0205 0.0651
Moderate Level of Technological Competency
0.051 0.021 0.0140 0.0971
High Level of Technological Competency
0.079 0.032 0.0224 0.1486
Note: controlling for age, gender, marital status, and caregiver status.
LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval.
f
oo
pr
e-
Pr
al
u rn
Jo
52
Page 52 of 52

1 s2.0 S1162908822001189 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S1162908822001189 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal Pre-proof

Enforced Remote Work During COVID-19 and The Importance of

Ayse Karaca Melike Eger Aydogmus Nilgun Gunbas

To appear in: Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée

Received Date: 22 September 2021

© 2022 Published by Elsevier.

Enforced Remote Work During COVID-19 and The Importance of Technological

Competency: A Job Demands-Resources Perspective

Télétravail Forcé Pendant La COVID-19 Et L’importance Des Compétence

Technologique : Perspective D’exigences-Ressources De L’épuisement Professionnel

Ayse Karaca, Ph.D (Corresponding Author)

Kütahya Dumlupinar Universitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü,

Evliya Çelebi Yerleşkesi Tavşanlı Yolu 10. km Kütahya, TURKEY

Melike Eger Aydogmus, Ph.D

Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Psikoloji Bölümü, 06800 Beytepe Ankara,

Tel: +90 530 0701727 Fax: +90 312 2992008 E-mail:melike.aydogmus@hacettepe.edu.tr

Nilgun Gunbas, Ed.D

Bölümü, 36100 Kars, TURKEY

competency on work performance through work engagement.

Télétravail forcé pendant la COVID-19 et l’importance des compétence technologique : Perspective

d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement professionnel

d’engagement et rendement des employés au télétravail.

le biais de l’engagement au travail.

technologique dans le processus du modèle d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement professionnel. Nos résultats

Mots-clés : pandémie de la Covid-19, Télétravail forcé, Modèle d’exigences-ressources de l’épuisement

professionnel, compétences technologique, rendement au travail

caused by COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, integrating the theories of Job Demands-Resources

relationship between job/personal resources and work engagement is moderated by another

personal resource, which is technological competency. Further, we test a moderated mediation

technological competency and job/personal resources on employee performance.

effects of job/personal resources on work-related outcomes. Such an effect could be derived

which moderates the effects of job/personal resources on work engagement.

1.1. The Motivational Process of the Job-Demands Resources Model

counterproductive performance (Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2019). While task performance refers to

contributions to organizational, social, and psychological aspects of one’s work environment

Rich et al., 2010).

certain costs through a strain-related process (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017).

performance. Engagement at work refers to “a work-related and high-activation positive state,

Regarding psychological resilience as an antecedent of work engagement, JD-R model

propose the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1a. Psychological resilience increases work engagement during enforced

enforced remote working.

1.2. The Role of Technological Competency

enhance the positive effects of job/personal resources on work engagement.

is conceptualized as positive evaluations of employees about their digital competencies, this

may affect one’s success at a task.

Regarding the role of technological competency as a moderator of the workplace support

with a high level of technological competency than their counterparts.

work engagement. Thus, we predict that technological competency or self-efficacy in technology

Hypothesis 3a. Technological competency moderates the positive relationship between

as technological competency increases.

Hypothesis 3b. Technological competency moderates the positive relationship between

technological competency increases.

moderating role of technological competency in the relationship between psychological

resilience/workplace support and technological competency will influence work performance.

psychological resilience and technological competency on work performance.

The theoretical framework of the study is shown in Figure 1.

2.1. Sample and Procedure

the majority (92%) were working at a public school.

by Doğan (2015) and 0.81 in this study.

for the work engagement scale was 0.91.

Technological Competency. The “Preservice Teachers’ Information and Communication

“ICT competencies for instructional design- [ICTC-ID].” Because we aimed at examining