ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE WORK INTEGRATION AND EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTERS IN NAIROBI COUNTY, KENYA

Authors

  • Loise Makara Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology
  • Joseph Obwogi Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology
  • Rebecca Ann Maina Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Abstract

Purpose of The Study: This study examined the relationship between on-site and off-site work integration (Hybrid Workplace Balance) on employee engagement in International Agricultural Research Centers (IARCs) in Nairobi County, Kenya.

Statement of the Problem: Flexibility can be achieved through hybrid working, while also posing challenges to coordination, communication, inclusion and continuity between office, remote and field work. Weak integration can diminish engagement gains from hybrid arrangements in IARCs where it can be common for work to be done both physically and virtually.

Methodology: The study adopted a cross-sectional descriptive and explanatory research design. The study population comprised 600 employees, from whom a sample of 240 was selected through stratified random sampling. A total of 232 usable questionnaires were returned. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression in SPSS Version 21, with hypotheses tested at a 5% significance level.

Results: Hybrid Workplace Balance recorded an overall mean of 3.86, while employee engagement recorded an overall mean of 3.87. Hybrid Workplace Balance had a strong, positive and statistically significant relationship with employee engagement (r = .760, p < .001). In the wider regression model, it remained a positive and significant predictor of employee engagement (β = .355, t = 7.614, p < .001) and recorded the largest standardised coefficient among the four hybrid work dimensions.

Conclusion: The study concluded that employee engagement is strengthened when on-site, remote and field-based work are integrated through clear coordination, consistent communication, inclusion and organizational support. However, flexibility across work locations is insufficient where work processes remain fragmented and disconnected.

Recommendation: Cross-location workflows should be enhanced, task ownership and task handover should be made clear, communication routines should be made location-neutral, and employee autonomy and work-life balance should be maintained and coordination should be enhanced between the field, the office and remote working.

Keywords: N-Site, Off-Site Work, Integration, Employee Engagement, International Agricultural Research

Author Biographies

  • Loise Makara, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

    Master’s Student, Department of Business Administration, School of Business and Entrepreneurship, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Nairobi, Kenya

  • Joseph Obwogi , Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

    Lecturer, Department of Business Administration, School of Business and Entrepreneurship, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Nairobi, Kenya

  • Rebecca Ann Maina, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

    Lecturer, Department of Business Administration, School of Business and Entrepreneurship, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Nairobi, Kenya

References

Adisa, T. A., Antonacopoulou, E., Beauregard, T. A., Dickmann, M., & Adekoya, O. D. (2022). Exploring the impact of COVID-19 on employees’ boundary management and work–life balance. British Journal of Management, 33(4), 1694–1709. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12643

Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(2), 40–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615593273

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands–Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2021). The Job Demands–Resources model: Challenges for future research. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 47(1), a1896.

Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. (2021). Work-from-anywhere: The productivity effects of geographic flexibility. Strategic Management Journal, 42(4), 589-615.

Eng, I., Tjernberg, M., & Champoux-Larsson, M.-F. (2024). Hybrid workers describe aspects that promote effectiveness, work engagement, work-life balance, and health. Cogent Psychology, 11(1), Article 2362535. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2024.2362535

Fuchs, C., & Reichel, A. (2023). Effective communication for relational coordination in remote work: How job characteristics and HR practices shape user–technology interactions. Human Resource Management, 62(4), 511–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22161

Handke, L., Aldana, A., Costa, P. L., & O’Neill, T. A. (2024). Hybrid teamwork: What we know and where we can go from here. Small Group Research, 55(5), 805–835. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964241279078

Kniffin, K. M., Narayanan, J., & Anseel, F. (2021). COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. American Psychologist, 76(1), 63–77.

Kothari, C. R., & Garg, G. (2020). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (4th ed.). New Age International Publishers.

Muturi, W. G., & Gichuki, S. (2022). Employee engagement and organizational performance in Kenya. African Journal of Business Management, 16(3), 125- 139.

Naqshbandi, M. M., Kabir, I., Ishak, N. A., & Islam, M. Z. (2023). The future of work: Work engagement and job performance in the hybrid workplace. The Learning Organization, 31(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-08-2022-0097

Oakman, J., Kinsman, N., Stuckey, R., Graham, M., & Weale, V. (2022). A rapid review of mental and physical health effects of working at home: How do we optimize health? BMC Public Health, 22(1), 199.

Oseghale, O. R., Pepple, D., Brookes, M., Lee, A., Alaka, H., Nyantakyiwaa, A., & Mokhtar, A. (2024). Covid-19, working from home and work–life boundaries: The role of personality in work–life boundary management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 35(21), 3556–3592. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2024.2422013

Saks, A. M. (2021). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 36(1), 105–121.

Salamon, J. S., Tóth-Király, I., Bőthe, B., Nagy, T., & Orosz, G. (2021). Having the cake and eating it too: First-order, second-order and bifactor representations of work engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 615581. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.615581

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 Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471

Van Tuin, L., Schaufeli, W. B., & van den Broeck, A. (2021). Engaging leadership: Enhancing work engagement through intrinsic values and need satisfaction. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 32(4), 483–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21430

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.

Willett, J. F., LaGree, D., Warner, B. R., Houston, J. B., & Duffy, M. (2024). Flourishing with flexibility: Leader communicative support of flexible work arrangements enhances employee engagement and well-being. International Journal of Business Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884241291531

Downloads

Published

2026-09-12

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 10 (2026)

Section

Articles

How to Cite

ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE WORK INTEGRATION AND EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTERS IN NAIROBI COUNTY, KENYA. (2026). African Journal of Emerging Issues, 8(10), 58-76. https://ajoeijournal.org/sys/index.php/ajoei/article/view/1287