Workplace working arrangements in Australia have changed considerably following the covid-19 pandemic. Before the pandemic remote work was only available for few and the majority of work performed in the workplace (Productivity Commission, 2021). With lockdowns and restrictive public health measures implemented to manage the pandemic, workplaces rapidly shifted large parts of their workforces to working from home, facilitated by technology (Chafi et al., 2022).Psychological safety is crucial in all workplaces, especially in remote and hybrid work settings, where clear communication, trust, empathy, inclusion, and employee well-being are essential for creating a safe and supportive environment. The present study explored the barriers and facilitators of psychological safety in remote, in-office and hybrid working arrangements, in post-pandemic Australia, and experiences of resource loss and gain in the context of psychological safety, based on conservation of resources theory (COR) (Hobfoll, 1989). A qualitative study was conducted to capture experiences across three working arrangements with data collected via two open-text questions in an online survey, analysed following Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis methodology (Braun & Clarke, 2006). 389 Australian employees (18 to 77 years old), with minimum 3 months tenure in current role participated. Working arrangement data captured indicated 43 remote, 164 in-office, and 182 hybrid workers. Results indicate six overall themes with corresponding barriers and facilitators of psychological safety applied across working arrangements. Within themes, such as a general supportive environment, differences in experiences, resource loss and gain were observed between the working arrangements. The study demonstrates that there are particular implications for hybrid workers, with greater breadth of experiences across all themes, and subthemes. Hybrid workers reflected negative in-office experiences, such as workplace incivility and discrimination, and positive experiences such as social support, and inclusive and diverse teams. However, they also shared positive experiences with remote workers such as manager support through personal issues, and were similarly vulnerable to negative experiences of job insecurity, and poor teamwork. They were the only group who raised personal anxieties as barriers to psychological safety. This highlighted a wider range of experiences for hybrid workers and specific action from managers that support psychological safety with remote and hybrid employees. This supports recent findings that hybrid workers experience the “best of both worlds”, while facing additional demands (Chafi et al., 2022), and that deliberate action from managers to build relationships and provide support is valued by hybrid workers (Sjöblom et al., 2022).

At conclusion of this presentation, attendees will have a better understanding of differences in perceived barriers and facilitators to psychological safety across different work arrangements.
At the conclusion of the presentation, attendees will have a better understanding of how to best support employees in various work arrangements.