The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new technology implementation and its impact on the balance between work and life

Trifan, Vanina Adoriana; Pantea, Mioara Florina Article The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new technology implementation and its impact on the balance between work and life Journal of Business Economics and Management (JBEM) Provided in Cooperation with: Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VILNIUS TECH) Suggested Citation: Trifan, Vanina Adoriana; Pantea, Mioara Florina (2023) : The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new technology implementation and its impact on the balance between work and life, Journal of Business Economics and Management (JBEM), ISSN 2029-4433, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Vol. 24, Iss. 3, pp. 489-505, https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2023.19500 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/317635 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Journal of Business Economics and Management ISSN 1611-1699 / eISSN 2029-4433 2023 Volume 24 Issue 3: 489–505 https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2023.19500 THE RECEPTIVITY OF YOUNGER GENERATION ROMANIAN EMPLOYEES TO NEW TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION AND ITS IMPACT ON THE BALANCE BETWEEN WORK AND LIFE Vanina Adoriana TRIFAN *, Mioara Florina PANTEA Faculty of Economics, University Aurel Vlaicu of Arad, Arad, Romania Received 11 May 2023; accepted 30 June 2023 Abstract. In the current era, technological advancement has completely changed many facets of our daily lives, such as the workplace, where modern-day companies are compelled to take proactive actions. Employees face the same challenges by shifting their practices from conventional to more innovative ones. This study explores Generation Z and Millennials‘ receptivity to technological advancement and how it impacts their personal and professional lives. By exploring four personalitybased characteristics– optimism, innovation, discomfort, and insecurity– this study develops clear pathways from the perspective of Romanian younger employees. The proposed research hypotheses were tested with a sample of 399 employees, and quantitative data analysis was carried out using partial least squares structural equation modelling. Our findings are expected to provide employers, human resource managers, recruiters, and policymakers with new insights that enable them to develop methods, strategies, policies, and measures tailored to the mentality and behavioural patterns of these specific target groups. Keywords: technology, employees, companies, personality-based characteristics, Romania. JEL Classification: J21, J28, M54, O33. Introduction In the 21st century, imagining a world without technology would be nearly impossible. Since its emergence, technology has served as a great tool that broadened the scope of human understanding and achievement, providing unimaginable control over both the built and social environment. Consequently, a modern-day company is dependent on its usage, and the same goes for employees working within the company. In today’s world, an employee relies more on technology than ever before, but as the old saying goes, every coin has two sides. Besides providing various benefits and offering a convenient lifestyle, technology has also created various challenges. With technological advancement and the digital age, people expected that the amount of work would reduce as their dependency on technologies increased. The reality, 490 V. A. Trifan, M. F. Pantea. The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new... however, is a lot different than expected. When it comes to making an overall judgment of technology and its impact on personal and professional lives, opinions are divided, as some point out a direct correlation between technological involvement and work-family conflicts, while others choose to keep an eye on its positive sides. According to previous scholars, despite having greater access to technology, the younger generation of employees is required to work longer hours, and organizations long for productivity. Paradoxically, people’s lives are moving faster and they don’t have as much time as they used to, even with significant gains in time as a result of technological developments (Hossain etal., 2018). In relation to this issue, Tennakoon and Senarathne (2020) explain that workers’ over-involvement in technology diverts their attention from their families to their work, even after office hours, invading their private space and ultimately disrupting a healthy boundary between professional and personal life. Furthermore, striking a balance between professional and personal life is much more difficult in the twentyfirst century, since organizational dynamism demand employees’ superior performance and dedication to their jobs with increased workplace responsibilities. Organizations demand people stay long hours in the office so as to reach organizational goals. On the other end, today’s families require greater levels of parental responsibilities than ever (Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020). Another way to look at the big picture would be to consider the recent workforce generational shifts by increasing the number of Millennials/Generation Y employees and the professional debut of the newest workforce generational group, Generation Z, accompanied by decreasing the number of Baby Boomers and the X Generation (Gabrielova & Buchko, 2021). Just like any other generation, these younger generations have their own unique characteristics and traits, ideals, and career expectations that differ from those of older ones (Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020; Ivasciuc etal., 2022; de Boer & Bordoloi, 2022). Moreover their attitude toward work and personal life has changed and the work-life balance has become one of the most important challenges in both developed and developing countries (Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020). The Millennials and Generation Z are prioritizing work-life balance more than any previous generation and they are less willing to make compromises or sacrifice other aspects of their lives in order to meet work expectations (Robak, 2017). Since people in these age groups are the future of the global workforce (Rzemieniak & Wawer, 2021), it wouldn’t be wise to ignore their perspectives and attitude. In this study, we explore Romanian Generation Z and Millennials’ receptivity to technological advancement and how it impacts their personal and professional lives, taking into consideration four human personality-based characteristics: optimism, innovation, discomfort, and insecurity. The proposed research hypotheses were tested with a sample of 399 employees from both the public and private sectors, and quantitative data analysis was carried out using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), using the statistics software package SmartPLS 3.0. The present study will contribute in the following ways. First, this study attempts to extend the existing body of knowledge by adding to the debate and by providing a clear image and a more comprehensive view through the lens of Romanian Millennials and Generation Z. Second, the study seeks to supplement the limited literature available in Romania on this Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2023, 24(3): 489–505 491 topic. Finally, this study is expected to provide insights into the perspectives of younger employees to employers, human resource managers, recruiters, and policymakers. The present study is structured as follows: In Section 1, past literature is reviewed and the hypotheses are stated. Section 2 describes the research methodology. The main findings are reported in Section 3, followed by conclusions of the research. 1. Literature review and hypotheses Nowadays, technological advancement has created additional challenges for modern-day companies, which must take proactive actions. In order to fulfill their life and work goals, employees face the same challenges because technological transformation demands employees’ capability to accept and adapt to the new environment by shifting their practices from conventional to more innovative ones. According to prior research, technological advancement may be correlated to positive as well as negative outcomes (Bouwmeester etal., 2021; Pelau etal., 2021; Szentesi etal., 2021; Nemțeanu etal., 2022; Pop etal., 2022; Aloulou etal., 2023). On the one hand, technology can act as a helping hand for employees and organizations across the world by serving them with benefits. Some of these include saving time, energy, and effort, along with lowering expenses and increasing flexibility in carrying out related tasks (Lonska etal., 2021). On the other hand, technology has also brought with it some serious challenges (Chen & Karahanna, 2018; Kane, 2019; Abdul Hamid, 2022; Vyas, 2022). With technological innovation and the digital age, people anticipated a decrease in the quantity of labor they performed as their dependency on technology increased. The reality, however, differs significantly from expectations. Despite having greater access to technology, the younger generation of employees fall burden to longer working hours as a result of organizations’ longing to achieve higher levels of productivity and commitment (Whelan etal., 2017; Hossain etal., 2018; Salo etal., 2019; Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020; Lamovšek etal., 2023). According to previous scholars, through a technology-connected lifestyle and allonline trend, the internet and mobile technologies have become omnipresent in our everyday lives and impact both personal and professional lives. On the one hand, technological development makes our lives easier; on the other hand, it facilitates our permanent connection to our work, affecting our personal lives (Holden & Sunindijo, 2018; Kumar & Priyadarshini, 2018; Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020; Bouwmeester etal., 2021; Aloulou etal., 2023). Regarding the role of technology in work and family, scientific opinion is divided. Hubbard (2016) points out that excessive technological involvement increases the amount of work-family conflict. Also, according to prior research, technological advancements such as internet and communication technology have fostered the culture of work as well as the expectation to work anytime and anywhere. Due to the rapid development of communication technology, employees are now compelled to use online communications tools that allow them to continue working after hours, limiting their time with family and capacity to maintain their well-being (Alleyne, 2016; Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020). Vyas (2022) points out that in order to create a healthy, stress-free environment and to enable employees to reach their full potential, it is necessary to achieve a balance between professional and personal life. 492 V. A. Trifan, M. F. Pantea. The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new... In the same line, Chan and Tay (2022) conclude that finding a balance between work and life may be a way of maintaining a healthy lifestyle. According to Chen and Karahanna (2014) and Maçada etal. (2022), technology is linked to feelings of dissatisfaction at the workplace, stressful work life, and psychological burnout. Also, one negative outcome of technology is commonly seen among employees when they make excessive use of technology for professional activities even during their personal time (Hubbard, 2016). Another adverse effect includes frequent usage of technology for entertainment purposes, even during work hours (Maçada etal., 2022). Hubbard (2016) points out that, on average, an American spends around three hours every day utilizing electronic gadgets and browsing the internet. This time does not include the extensive time spent using technology at work, which may reach eight hours per day. Furthermore, one concerning aspect highlighted by Chen and Karahanna (2018) and Tams etal. (2022) is that companies encourage their workers to use their personal mobile phones for professional activities. Workers are required to stay connected to mobile technologies in order to respond even after the workday has ended. This leads to an increased number of work-related problems after working hours, disturbing the personal time planned to be spent with family members and ultimately affecting their work-life balance (Hubbard, 2016; Alleyne, 2016; Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020; Maçada etal., 2022). Marsh etal. (2022) found that Generation Z workers are more likely to demand corporate policies that restrict or limit work-related communication outside of work hours. Even if some appear unaffected by such technological intrusion into their private space, others expect more defined boundaries between their personal and professional lives. Moreover, failure to do so leads to stress, dissatisfaction, and, in worst-case scenarios, even psychological burnout (Chen & Karahanna, 2014; Kotera & Correa Vione, 2020; Maçada etal., 2022). In this regard, the Philippines and France have implemented legislation regarding the right to disconnect, which gives employees the right to not respond to work-related activities and requests during non-working hours (Vyas, 2022). Although many studies have focused on the negative impacts of technology, it would not be fair to completely ignore its positive side. According to Vyas (2022) and Holden and Sunindijo (2018), technological development provides employees greater flexibility and makes their lives easier. Moreover, in today’s world, most of office work is performed using computers and other technological devices, making businesses more dependent on technology (Lonska etal., 2021). Scholars as Vyas (2022) explain that without technology, business adaptation during the COVID-19 pandemic to remote working would have been impossible. Moreover, during the pandemic, many people even associated technology as a positive factor that promoted work-life balance, since they were able to spend more time with their families at home (Vyas, 2022). According to Tennakoon and Senarathne (2020), because people from the younger generation were born and raised in the digital age, it is relatively easier for them to deal with technological advancement. This could be a result of younger generations being more skilled at using technology, as Nikou etal. (2022) find that higher levels of information literacy and digital literacy are linked to a greater perception of the ease of technology usage. Nasah etal. (2010) challenges this conclusion through their findings that, while the usage of certain digi- Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2023, 24(3): 489–505 493 tal activities like social networking sites is dependent on age, age is not the most important factor in predicting an individual’s level of digital literacy. According to previous researchers, the tendency of individuals to adapt to new environments varies and depends on each person’s personality (Park & Park, 2019; Abdul Hamid, 2022). Regarding employees’ perceptions of technological progress and their willingness to adapt, these depend on their subjective understanding, as they may have different perspectives of being ready or unprepared to adapt to the new environment (Abdul Hamid, 2022). Previous research has concluded that the overall mindset of technology readiness is dependent on a variety of mental signals that determine an individual’s likelihood to use technology in a beneficial way that leads them toward accomplishing both personal and professional (Parasuraman, 2000; Abdul Hamid, 2022). According to Parasuraman (2000), an individual’s technology readiness can be measured using a multiple-item scale known as the Technology Readiness Index (TRI). TRI defined and developed by Parasuraman (2000), is widely applied to understand individuals perceptions of technological progress and their readiness to meet and adopt the new technology. Taking into consideration four human personality-based characteristics, TRI comprises optimism, innovativeness, discomfort, and insecurity. These four components can be categorized into two categories: motivators and inhibitors. On the one hand, motivators are optimistic and innovative feelings about technology, on the other hand, inhibitors are uncomfortable and unsafe feelings about the use of technology (Ali etal., 2019; Parasuraman, 2000; Abdul Hamid, 2022). Previous research has shown that employees who have a positive perception of technology perceive its utility and adapt to it more easily than others. An optimistic employee will make an effort to learn how to utilize new technology and use it to their advantage (Aldunate & Nussbaum, 2013). People with an optimistic attitude are more likely to focus on the positive aspects of technology and accept it, and they would be far less affected by its negative effects (Ali etal., 2019; Alyoubi & Yamin, 2019; Parasuraman, 2000). Also, the scholars explain that innovation is specific to the people that embrace technology without hesitation, even if its benefits and values are controversial (Ali etal., 2019; Parasuraman, 2000). Kim etal. (2009) and Abdul Hamid (2022) explain that when employees positively perceive technology they are more likely to be motivated to learn and enhance their knowledge and abilities through the identification of productivity and work-related tools, leading to a more productive workplace. These people simply consider that technology may boost their productivity at work and provide them greater flexibility and the potential to adapt in a variety of ways (Ali etal., 2019; Parasuraman, 2000; Abdul Hamid, 2022). Moreover, according to Kuper (2020), if employees see that doing their activities using technology gives them a sense of purpose, then technology serves as an effective support mechanism rather than a system that controls them. Therefore, based on the positive perception of technology we propose our research hypotheses, as follows: – Hypothesis 1 (H1). An optimistic attitude toward using technology is positively correlated with a balance between work and life. – Hypothesis 2 (H2). Innovative attitudes towards using technology have a positive relationship with balancing work and life. 494 V. A. Trifan, M. F. Pantea. The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new... On the other hand, uncomfortable and unsafe feelings about technology act as inhibitors toward technology (Ali etal., 2019; Parasuraman, 2000; Abdul Hamid, 2022). Due to their internal fear of technology, insecure people are hesitant to use newer technologies because insecurity is a lack of confidence in technology and a concern that it will not perform as expected. Those with larger degrees of insecurity view the probability of certain risks associated with employing the most advanced technologies as being higher. Discomfort may be defined as a deficiency of control over technology and a sense of getting overwhelmed. People who exhibit this personality-based characteristic, experience anxiety and feel worried when using technology since they think that it’s controlling them (Ali etal., 2019; Parasuraman, 2000). Therefore, based on the negative perception of technology we propose our research hypotheses, as follows: – Hypothesis 3 (H3). Distrust of technology is negatively related to the balance of work and life. – Hypothesis 4 (H4). Feelings of lack of control over technology are negatively related to work-life balance. 2. Research methodology 2.1. Research design and sample The main objective of this study is to explore, from an empirical perspective, Romanian younger employees’ receptivity to technological advancement and how it impacts their balance between work and life. Optimism, innovation, discomfort, and insecurity are four human personality-based characteristics under consideration. A quantitative approach was used to empirically validate the proposed research hypotheses. The research questionnaire was distributed to Romanian public and private sector employees via a Google Form by employing a simple sampling technique. The target population of this study was represented by Millennials/Generation Y and Generation Z. According to previous scholars, in this study, Millennials or Generation Y comprise individuals born between 1980 and 1994, and the Z Generation are those born between 1995 and 2010 (Dabija etal., 2022; Mahapatra etal., 2022; Rzemieniak & Wawer, 2021; Bednall etal., 2012; Jorgensen, 2003). It is important to note that different sources and authors may use somewhat different age segment to identify each generation’s birth years. Before commencing the data collection, participants were informed about the target population and about the purpose of this study. Their participation was completely voluntary. In addition, participants did not receive any benefits for filling out the questionnaire. Initially, a total of 406 questionnaires were received. After an initial check, the final sample consists of 399 responses used for analysis. A comprehensive description of the participants in the sample is presented in Table 1. The majority of the respondents, 234 (58.6%), are people from Generation Z, while the remaining 165 (41.4%) are represented by Millennials/Generation Y. Most of the respondents were female 276 (69.2%), while the remaining 123 (30.8%) were male. Most of the respondents were single 166 (41.6%). 142 (35.6%) of the respondents were married, and the majority 275 (68.9%) had no children. In terms of education level, 193 (48.4%) of the respondents Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2023, 24(3): 489–505 495 Table 1. Sample description (N = 399) (source: authors estimation) Demographics Frequency Percentage (%) Age <29 234 41.4 29–43 165 58.6 Gender Male 123 30.8 Female 276 69.2 Marital Status Married 142 35.6 Single 166 41.6 Others 91 22.8 Number of children None 275 68.9 1 74 18.6 2 46 11.5 3 or more 4 1 Education Lower than high school 0 0 High School 193 48.4 Bachelor’s Degree 146 36.6 Master’s Degree 55 13.8 PhD 5 1.2 Career field Information Technology 19 4.8 Administrative/Management 43 10.8 Industry/Production 64 16.1 Education 43 10.8 Finance/Accounting 76 19 Customer Service 26 6.6 Marketing/Sales 35 8.7 Human Resources 12 3 Consultancy 8 2 Other 73 18.2 Work Private entities 289 72.4 Public sector entities 110 27.6 Working Hours Full-time 359 90 Part-time 40 10 Work experience (years) <1 90 22.6 1–5 152 38.1 6–10 63 15.8 11–20 80 20 >20 14 3.5 Income level <2000 57 14.3 2000–4000 229 57.4 4000–6000 77 19.3 6000–8000 16 4 >8000 20 5 496 V. A. Trifan, M. F. Pantea. The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new... had a high school degree as their highest level of education. Concerning the respondents’ occupations, 289 (72.4%) had a private job. The largest portion of respondents, 76 (19%), have a Finance/Accounting career field. 289 (72.4%) of the respondents activated in the private sector and 110 (27.6%) in public sector entities. The largest portion of respondents, 152 (38.1%), have work experience ranging from one to five years. Regarding the income of respondents, 229 (57.4%) had an income in lei between 2000–4000 per month. The majority of the respondents 359 (90%) worked full-time, while the remaining 40 (10%) worked part-time. 2.2. Questionnaire design and measures The questionnaire consists of 27 items, grouped into two sections. The first section includes 16 constructs adopted or adapted from previous research in this field (Hubbard, 2016; Hossain etal., 2018; Tennakoon & Senarathne, 2020). The feeling of balance between work and life was measured with six items, the optimist attitude towards using technology was measured with three items, the innovative attitude towards using technology was measured with three items, the distrust of technology was measured with two items, and the feeling of lack of control over technology was measured with two items. All items were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagreeing (1) to strongly agreeing (5). The second section contains 11 questions about the demographics of the respondents. We utilized PLS-SEM as the statistical tool to test the research hypotheses. Two different parts of data analysis are required for PLS-SEM. The first part of the data analysis validated the measurement model, while the second explored the hypothesized correlations between the constructs. 3. Research results 3.1. Measurement model evaluation Reflective measurement evaluation requires three main assessment criteria: internal consistency, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Using composite reliability (CR), internal consistency was verified. Factor loadings (FL) and values of average variance extracted (AVE) allowed for the determination of convergent validity. In reference to Table 2, Skewness and Kurtosis values for all constructs were between the standard levels of –2 and +2, validating the normality test of the data. For the vast majority of constructs, both the composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach Alpha (CA) values are higher than 0.7. This shows that our data is consistent and reliable. The lack of control value for CR is less than 0.7 because it has two items, but their factor loading (FL) values are greater than the standard value. For CA, the lowest value was 0.681, which is considered a moderate one (Hair etal., 2019). Our findings indicate good convergent validity, as the FL is greater than 0.7 and the value of the average variance extracted (AVE) fulfills the criteria. The collinearity issue was verified by Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values. The result showed that the values of the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) varied between 1.055 and 1.385 indicating that our model does not exhibit multicollinearity. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2023, 24(3): 489–505 503 Bouwmeester, O., Atkinson, R., Noury, L., & Ruotsalainen, R. (2021). Work-life balance policies in high performance organisations: A comparative interview study with millennials in Dutch consultancies. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 35(1), 6–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002220952738 Chan, X. W., & Tay, S. (2022). Extending work-life balance initiatives. In P. Brough, E. Gardiner, & K.Daniels (Eds.), Handbook series in occupational health sciences: Vol.3. Handbook on management and employment practices (pp. 711–726). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29010-8_31 Chen, A., & Karahanna, E. (2014). Boundaryless technology: Understanding the effects of technologymediated interruptions across the boundaries between work and personal life. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(2), 16–36. https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00059 Chen, A., & Karahanna, E. (2018). Life interrupted: The effects of technology-mediated work interruptions on work and nonwork outcomes. MIS Quarterly, 42(4), 1023–1042. Dabija, D. C., Câmpian, V., Pop, A. R., & Băbuț, R. (2022). Generating loyalty towards fast fashion stores: A cross-generational approach based on store attributes and socioenvironmental responsibility. Oeconomia Copernicana, 13(3), 891–934. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2022.026 de Boer, P., & Bordoloi, P. (2022). Nationality differences in Gen Z work values: An exploratory study. Journal of International Education in Business, 15(2), 373–392. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-09-2021-0088 Gabrielova, K., & Buchko, A. A. (2021). Here comes Generation Z: Millennials as managers. Business Horizons, 64(4), 489–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.013 Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203 Holden, S., & Sunindijo, R. Y. (2018). Technology, long work hours, and stress worsen work-life balance in the construction industry. International Journal of Integrated Engineering, 10(2), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.30880/ijie.2018.10.02.003 Hossain, M. I., Limon, N., Amin, M. T., & Asheq, A. S. (2018). Work life balance trends: A study on Malaysian GenerationY Bankers. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 20(9), 1–9. Hubbard, A. G. (2016). The effect of technology on work-life balance: Women in higher education [Master thesis]. James Madison University. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/153207985.pdf Ivasciuc, I. S., Epuran, G., Vuță, D. R., & Tescașiu, B. (2022). Telework implications on work-life balance, productivity, and health of different generations of Romanian employees. Sustainability, 14(23), 16108. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142316108 Jorgensen, B. (2003). Baby Boomers, Generation X and Generation Y? Policy implications for defence forces in the modern era. Foresight, 5(4), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680310494753 Kane, G. (2019). The technology fallacy: People are the real key to digital transformation. ResearchTechnology Management, 62(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1661079 Kim, T. Y., Hon, A. H., & Crant, J. M. (2009). Proactive personality, employee creativity, and newcomer outcomes: A longitudinal study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9094-4 Kotera, Y., & Correa Vione, K. (2020). Psychological impacts of the new ways of working (NWW): A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 5080. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145080 Kumar, K. A., & Priyadarshini, R. G. (2018, March). Study to measure the impact of social media usage on work-life balance. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering: Vol.390, 012045. The 3rd International Conference on Materials and Manufacturing Engineering. Tamilnadu, India. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/390/1/012045 504 V. A. Trifan, M. F. Pantea. The receptivity of younger generation Romanian employees to new... Kuper, H. (2020). Industry 4.0: Changes in work organization and qualification requirements– challenges for academic and vocational education. Entrepreneurship Education, 3, 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-020-00029-1 Lamovšek, A., Černe, M., Radević, I., & Božič, K. (2023). The key to work–life balance is (enriched) job design? Three-way interaction effects with formalization and adaptive personality characteristics. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 18, 647–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-022-10100-9 Lonska, J., Mietule, I., Litavniece, L., Arbidane, I., Vanadzins, I., Matisane, L., & Paegle, L. (2021). Work–life balance of the employed population during the emergency situation of COVID-19 in Latvia. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 682459. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.682459 Maçada, A. C. G., Freitas Junior, J. C. da S., Brinkhues, R. A., & Vasconcellos, S. (2022). Life interrupted, but performance improved: Rethinking the influence of technology-mediated interruptions at work and personal life. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 7(1), e0279. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i1.279 Mahapatra, G. P., Bhullar, N., & Gupta, P. (2022). Gen Z: An emerging phenomenon. NHRD Network Journal, 15(2), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/26314541221077137 Marsh, E., Vallejos, E. P., & Spence, A. (2022). The digital workplace and its dark side: An integrative review. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 107118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118 Nasah, A., DaCosta, B., Kinsell, C., & Seok, S. (2010). The digital literacy debate: An investigation of digital propensity and information and communication technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 531–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9151-8 Nemțeanu, M. S., Dinu, V., Pop, R. A., & Dabija, D. C. (2022). Predicting job satisfaction and work engagement behavior in the COVID-19 pandemic: A conservation of resources theory approach. E&M Economics and Management, 25(2), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2022-2-002 Nikou, S., De Reuver, M., & Mahboob Kanafi, M. (2022). Workplace literacy skills– how information and digital literacy affect adoption of digital technology. Journal of Documentation, 78(7), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-12-2021-0241 Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001 Park, S., & Park, S. (2019). Employee adaptive performance and its antecedents: Review and synthesis. Human Resource Development Review, 18(3), 294–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484319836315 Pelau, C., Ene, I., & Pop, M. I. (2021). The impact of artificial intelligence on consumers’ identity and human skills. Amfiteatru Economic, 23(56), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2021/56/33 Pop, R. A., Dabija, D. C., Pelău, C., & Dinu, V. (2022). Usage intentions, attitudes, and behaviors towards energy-efficient applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 23(3), 668–689. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2022.16959 Robak, E. (2017). Expectations of generation Y connected with shaping the work-life balance. The case of Poland. Oeconomia Copernicana, 8(4), 569–584. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.v8i4.35 Rzemieniak, M., & Wawer, M. (2021). Employer branding in the context of the company’s sustainable development strategy from the perspective of gender diversity of generation Z. Sustainability, 13(2), 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020828 Salo, M., Pirkkalainen, H., & Koskelainen, T. (2019). Technostress and social networking services: Explaining users’ concentration, sleep, identity, and social relation problems. Information Systems Journal, 29(2), 408–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12213 Szentesi, S. G., Cuc, L. D., Lile, R., & Cuc, P. N. (2021). Internet of Things (IoT), challenges and perspectives in Romania: A qualitative research. Amfiteatru Economic, 23(57), 448–464. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2021/57/448 Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2023, 24(3): 489–505 505 Tams, S., Grover, V., Thatcher, J., & Ahuja, M. (2022). Grappling with modern technology: Interruptions mediated by mobile devices impact older workers disproportionately. Information Systems and eBusiness Management, 20(4), 635–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-021-00526-3 Tennakoon, W. D. N. S. M., & Senarathne, R. B. C. P. (2020). Investigating the determinants of WorkLife Balance (WLB): Insights from Generation Y employees in Sri Lanka. South Asian Journal of Social Studies and Economics, 8(4), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.9734/sajsse/2020/v8i430226 Vyas, L. (2022). “New normal” at work in a post-COVID world: Work–life balance and labor markets. Policy and Society, 41(1), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puab011 Whelan, E., Islam, N., & Brooks, S. (2017). Cognitive control and social media overload. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), 12. https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2017/ SocialComputing/Presentations/12