Employee Perceptions, Proximity Bias, and Performance Evaluation in Hybrid Work: The Quasi-Moderating Role of Work Flexibility and Virtual Interaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24256/kharaj.v7i4.8626Keywords:
proximity bias, hybrid work, virtual interaction, employee perception, work flexibility, performance evaluationAbstract
The development of hybrid work systems has brought about new dynamics in employee performance appraisal. This study aims to analyze the effect of employee perceptions of hybrid work (PK) and proximity bias (PB) on performance evaluation (EK), with work flexibility and virtual interaction (FI) as moderating and mediating variables. The study used three regression models, namely Model 1 (direct effect), Model 2(additional moderation), and Model 3 (interaction test), followed by a mediation test. The results showed that in Model 1,PK (0.437) and PB (0.369) had a positive and significant effect on EK. In Model 2, the addition of the FI variable produced a positive and significant effect on EK (PK = 0.110; PB = 0.290; FI = 0.440). Model 3 found that PK,PB, and FI remained positively and significantly influential (PK = 0.140; PB = 0.264; FI= 0.503), with the interaction PKFI strengthening the effect of PK on EK (0.346),while the interaction PBFI weakens the effect of PK on EK(-0.363). The mediation test shows that FI acts as a quasi-moderator and mediator in the relationship between PK and PB on EK.These findings confirm that in the context of hybrid work, work flexibility and virtual interaction not only clarify performance evaluation but can also reduce the effect of physical presence bias(proximity bias). This research has implications for human resource management strategies in designing fair and productive hybrid work policies.
References
Baker, G. (2002). The effects of synchronous collaborative technologies on decision making: A study of virtual teams. Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), 15(4), 79-93.
Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. Z. (2023). Proximity bias in hybrid work: How managerial beliefs shape performance evaluations. Academy of Management Journal.
Chung, H., Seo, H., Forbes, S. and Birkett, H. (2020), Working from Home during the COVID-19 Lockdown: Changing Preferences and the Future of Work Project Report, University of Kent (KAR id:83896), available at: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/college-social-sciences/ business/research/wirc/epp-working-from-home-covid-19-lockdown.pdf
Coulston, C., Shergill, S., Twumasi, R., & Duncan, M. (2025). Advancing virtual and hybrid team well-being through a job demand-resources lens. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 20(1), 2472460.
Dale, G., Wilson, H., & Tucker, M. (2024). What is healthy hybrid work? Exploring employee perceptions on well-being and hybrid work arrangements. International journal of workplace health management, 17(4), 335-352.
Eurofound (2022), The rise in telework: Impact on working conditions and regulations, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Gifford, J. (2022), “Remote working: unprecedented increase and a developing research agenda”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 105-113, doi: 10.1080/13678868. 2022.2049108.
Hossain, L., & Wigand, R. T. (2003). Understanding virtual collaboration through structuration. In Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Knowledge Management (pp. 475–484).
Kaiser, S., Suess, S., Cohen, R., Mikkelsen, E.N. and Pedersen, A.R. (2022), “Working from home: findings and prospects for further research”, German Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 205-212, doi: 10.1177/23970022221106973.
Lee, S., & Park, J. (2024). Virtual interaction and performance appraisal accuracy in hybrid teams. Scientific Reports, 14, 11245
Mabaso, C. M., & Manuel, N. (2024). Performance management practices in remote and hybrid work environments: An exploratory study. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 50(1), 1-13.
Orta-Castañon, P., Urbina-Coronado, P., Ahuett-Garza, H., Hernández-de-Menéndez, M., & Morales-Menendez, R. (2018). Social collaboration software for virtual teams: Case studies. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 12(1), 15–24.
Seo, B. G., & Park, D. H. (2025). Evaluating employee performance in smart work environment with focus on psychological distance and process versus outcome-centric approaches. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 9089.
Spitzmuller, M., Xiao, C. and Woznowski, M. (2023), “Managing team interdependence to address the Great Resignation”, Personnel Review, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 425-433, doi: 10.1108/PR-09-2022-0635.
Taneja, S., Mizen, P. & Bloom, N., 2021. Working from home is revolutionising the UK labour market, Vox. United States of America. Retrieved from https://coilink.org/20.500.12592/vbj2gw on 10 Dec 2025. COI: 20.500.12592/vbj2gw.
(2022). The rise in telework: Impact on working conditions and regulations.
Wang, B., Liu, Y., Qian, J., & Parker, S. K. (2023). Achieving effective remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic: A work design perspective. Applied Psychology, 72(1), 41–70.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ryan Saputra Alam, Nur Imam Saifuloh, Noviarti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. In line with the license, authors are allowed to share and adapt the material. In addition, the material must be given appropriate credit, provided with a link to the license, and indicated if changes were made. If authors remix, transform or build upon the material, authors must distribute their contributions under the same license as the original.
