46 Oravec
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Chapter III
When Work Morphs into
Play: Using Constructive
Recreation to Support the
Flexible Workplace
Jo Ann Oravec
University of Wisconsin - Whitewater, USA
ABSTRACT
Organizations have become more permeable — integrating more influences
from the outside world — as participants engage in such online diversions
as trading stocks, engaging in multiplayer games, or viewing images of
their children in daycare. Availability of these activities has brought the
potential for abuse but also new opportunities. Constructive uses of
online recreation and play can enhance many workplaces (especially
high-tech and information-saturated ones) and perhaps ultimately make
them more productive. Human resource (HR) professionals can become
active in exploring and tailoring constructive recreation strategies for
Using Constructive Recreation to Support the Flexible Workplace 47
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
specific workplace contexts. Many organizational roles today demand
high levels of creativity and mental flexibility, and constructive uses of
online recreation can help individuals gain fresh perspectives. This
chapter proposes that these complex issues be resolved through
participatory approaches, involving workgroups and HR professionals in
discussions as to what constitutes “constructive recreation,” as well as in
development and dissemination of effective and fair organizational
policies.

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Everyday workplace life is becoming more diverse and chaotic. Its
complex and varying aspects (such as convoluted schedules and malleable
timeframes) are often attempts to accommodate massive industrial, technologi-
cal, and economic shifts (Epstein & Kalleberg, 2001; Gilbert & Bower, 2002;
Ofori-Dankwa & Julian, 2001). Although many organizational roles today
demand high levels of creativity and mental flexibility, they can also fail to
provide the means through which individuals can gain fresh perspectives.
Managers who expect employees not to use the Internet for some amount of
off-task activity severely misjudge the nature of workplace life — which is
solidly infused in online interaction. Depriving employees of opportunities for
Internet recreation in some cases excludes the possibility of nearly any form of
diversion from assigned responsibilities. This chapter proposes that these
complex issues be resolved through participatory approaches, involving
workgroups in discussions as to what constitutes “constructive recreation” as
well as in development and dissemination of effective and fair policies. This
discourse can also ultimately increase levels of trust among team members and
between employees and management. Enabling the constructive use of online
recreation is certainly not a panacea for workplace ills. However, it can be part
of overall strategies to manage people through mutually agreed-upon goal-
setting and assessment of outcomes — rather than by what they simply appear
to be doing.
SOME BACKGROUND ON THE ISSUES
Workplace use of the Internet for activities that are not directly authorized
by management is often considered as the “theft” of human and computer time
— comparable to absconding with other forms of organizational resources.
Even though many managers consider the personal use of the Internet as an
ethical lapse (Greengard, 2000), the “moral high ground” concerning these
issues is not entirely clear. Much of the rhetoric and advertising copy associated
with workplace computing incorporates recreational imageries and motifs,

creativity and increasing well-being, just as appropriate and timely face-to-face
diversions have restored employees’ energies over the past decades. How-
ever, some individuals may not be able to deal with online recreation construc-
tively. They indeed will use it in ways that affect their organizations and
themselves negatively, just as some individuals cannot perform adequately on
the job for other reasons. Forms of “positive discipline” can be utilized if
employees choose to exceed reasonable, agreed-upon limits; implementing
such discipline “requires that the supervisor and employee work together to
correct the problem behavior” (Guffey & Helms, 2001). Managers and
employees should strive together to harness online recreation toward positive
ends, rather than condemning or seeking to stifle it completely.
WHAT IS “CONSTRUCTIVE RECREATION”?
Online recreation has already served many supportive purposes in orga-
nizations; games can be used to help decrease computer anxiety and encourage
experimentation (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000; Oravec, 1999). What would
make online recreation optimally beneficial to individuals, project teams, and
50 Oravec
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
the organization as a whole? To start the discussion: recreation is “constructive”
when it is in synch with pending work responsibilities, allowing individuals to use
time not consumed by workplace demands in ways that equip them to face
future tasks with greater energy and expanded perspectives. Constructive
recreation is also in keeping with technological constraints, as exemplified by
the organizations that allow online recreation but place limits during certain
hours to avoid system overload (Gibbs, 1998; Verton, 2000). Policies estab-
lished are crafted in participatory ways, and are disseminated broadly (such as
some of the policies described in Verespej, 2000).
The major impetus behind constructive recreation is in facilitating the rapid
adaptation of individuals to changing circumstances. Online recreation and play

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Many employees work long hours (often voluntarily) and are reluctant to
leave their workstations or other network connections for vacations or even for
weekends, given increasing levels of competition and economic uncertainty
(Deetz, 1995). Knowledge workers often need to accomplish tasks for which
strict timeframes are counterproductive (Alvesson, 2000), for example be-
cause of time-zone differences among collaborators. An Ipsos-Reid poll
relates that approximately 43% of employees claim that they are formally “on
call” for extended hours or bring assigned work duties home (Samuelson,
2001). Home life is increasingly hectic as well, and the interaction between
work and home life can intensify personal and household stress (Jacobs &
Gerson, 2001; Schor, 1991). Workplace absences (especially when they are
unscheduled) have a devastating “ripple” effect in organizations (Robinson,
2002), thus affording employees some leeway on-the-job can thus often result
in considerable savings of resources.
The value of recreation and play in adult realms is not well-understood.
Credible evidence that individuals who engage in online play are more produc-
tive or happier than those who do not will probably never be forthcoming —
just as research about related workplace issues often tends to be non-
conclusive. Play has been given an assortment of definitions in the academic and
research literatures (with examinations in the fields of social psychology,
philosophy, and anthropology); it is often considered in both its adult and child
modes as a “cognitive and symbolic act that is fundamental to the human
representational process” (Myers, 1999). Across species as well as cultures,
play has been shown to help individuals prepare for the unexpected by
presenting varying streams of novel or challenging situations (Spinka, 2001).
Play is generally considered as a support for children’s intellectual and social
development, but its role in adult lives is less clear. Corbell (1999) projects that
there are considerable similarities in the kinds of learning that adults and
children can gain from gaming, although adults can put these new insights and

organizations have sponsored picnics and celebrations with the strategy of
increasing workplace cohesion.
As employees (including many white collar as well as knowledge workers)
telecommute or put in long and irregular hours, the adhesive that binds
organizations has been increasingly conveyed through electronic channels.
However, it is unclear what kinds of online activity can foster social capital
(Uslaner, 2000). Just as human resource experts struggled early in the 20
th
century to integrate face-to-face recreation into workplace contexts, organiza-
tions should attempt similar feats in online realms, thus making online recreation
a shared and open resource rather than a secretive endeavor (Oravec, 1996).
Unlike many early human relations experiments, the recreational activities
involved should be developed in a participatory (rather than patriarchal)
fashion. Whether organization-approved fantasy football, discussion group
and collaborative filtering forums, joke-of-the-day contests, or other recre-
ations are ultimately successful will depend on how they fit into everyday
working experiences.
Constructive use of online recreation can also help to dispel a number of
unfortunate and demeaning workplace practices that ultimately serve to erode
Using Constructive Recreation to Support the Flexible Workplace 53
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
trust. In many organizational contexts where face-to-face interaction is in-
volved, employees must go through the effort of looking busy when managers
are present; they must create an acceptable “work face” that supposedly
reflects productive effort. Often, both managers and employees feel that they
have to put in extended hours or make other visible sacrifices for the organi-
zation, even when these efforts are apparently not needed for organizational
productivity (Alvesson, 2000). Arlie Hochschild (1983) provides examples of
such forms of “emotional labor.” For instance, flight attendants must appear to

wireless Internet games).
As workplaces have evolved, so have the issues that have divided
employers and managers. Some organizations have taken positive steps to help
employees deal with workplace and home pressures (Munck, 2001) and have
recognized the importance of loyalty (Alvesson, 2000). However, conflict has
ensued for decades on an assortment of matters relating to the quality of work
life, often leading to dysfunctional confrontations (Edwards, 1978). Today,
employees who guess wrong about online recreation standards — or choose
to violate them — often pay large penalties, even being demoted or fired. Some
managers have devised negative sanctions for these infringements far more
severe than those applied to comparable face-to-face interaction. Office
workers paging through paper catalogs in idle minutes rarely face the harsh
penalties that those caught shopping online often encounter, even though few
computer systems can be construed as “overtaxed” by online shopping. For
example, Westlake Chemical in West Charles, Louisiana, simply eliminated
access to the Internet to hundreds of employees when managers discovered
how much unauthorized Internet activity was going on (Sloan & Yablon, 2000).
Companies have encountered considerable penalties as well: Microsoft agreed
to a $2.2 million settlement in a sexual-harassment suit involving pornographic
messages distributed in an organizational e-mail (Verespej, 2000).
Hard-line positions against forms of online recreation may be required in
some instances and directly related to important organizational goals. For
instance, air traffic controllers should be expected to keep focused on landing
real airplanes rather than escape into fantasy games during assigned hours.
However, some hard-line restrictions can reflect fear or lack of understanding
of online realms. Management may assume that online recreation will foster or
encourage Internet addiction or related concerns. “Internet addiction” has
become a widely identified syndrome, although its medical underpinnings are
still in question (Beard, 2002; Oravec, 2000). The kinds of non-work activities
that are allowed in organizations often mirror managerial culture and values,

obtained during breaks and unoccupied moments in the workplace rather than
after-work initiatives. Many employees (especially in high-tech fields) are on
call for long periods, with their know-how required for troubleshooting
networks or debugging software programs. Online recreation is part of some
individuals’ efforts to make these lengthy and demanding working hours more
tolerable. A number of online recreational activities can be conducted while
productive activity is going on, in a kind of human multitasking. Such multitasking
can provide problems if individuals overreach their capacities, in ways compa-
rable to the problem of drivers who engage in cell phone conversations on the
road (Consumer Reports, 2002). Individuals can check online sports scores
while on hold for a telephone call, which can relieve frustration. However,
online recreation should not be exploited as a means to keep individuals glued
to workstations for indefinite periods in lieu of reasonable work schedules and
functional work-life balances.
Solutions as to how to couple online work and play are emerging in
organizations that are tailored to specific workplace contexts. Managers and
employees are gaining important experience in resolving these issues as
individuals perform activities away from direct supervision via mobile comput-
56 Oravec
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
ing or virtual office configurations. Managers are learning how to perform their
functions without direct employee surveillance. Employees are learning higher
levels of self-discipline and the skills of balancing online work and play — just
as they have learned to balance face-to-face schmoozing with task orientation
in the physical world. Thus setting severe restrictions on online recreation can
serve to slow down the process of understanding how to migrate the organiza-
tion into virtual realms and establish trust. Responsibility and respect for others
in these realms can be difficult to acquire, and many employees will indeed need
direction. Those who stray from “netiquette” standards in online discussions are

Rather than going through the emotional labor of looking busy, employees can
utilize spare moments on the job in recharging their mental batteries. Construc-
tive use of recreation will require a number of changes, such as increases in
managerial flexibility and employee empowerment (as described as the “new
employment relationship” outlined in Boswell, Moynihan, Roehling, &
Cavanaugh, 2001). Organizational participants must learn how to handle the
distractions and opportunities of increasingly porous workplaces, with their
many external influences. Education and training provided by HR professionals
can be useful in these initiatives: novice employees can be aided to couple work
and recreation in ways that increase overall effectiveness. Constructive recre-
ation strategies can bring these complex matters into the open, rather than allow
them to be objects of rumor and fear. Rumor in organizations can have the effect
of distorting the issues involved (Scheibel, 2000), making knowledge and
power imbalances the primary items of contention rather than the issues at hand.
Forms of online diversion are already becoming integral elements of
everyday workplace life, often serving to humanize and enhance organizations.
Negotiation and discourse on constructive recreation issues can increase
mutual trust and respect concerning online as well as face-to-face activity. With
effort on everyone’s part (and the coordination strategies of human resource
professionals), the constructive use of online recreation can help the entire
organization work harder and play harder.
REFERENCES
Abrams, R. (2000). Let’s all go out to play. New Statesman, 129(4512), 36-
37.
Agarwal, R. & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun:
Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage.
MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-695.
Alvesson, M. (2000). Social identity and the problem of loyalty in knowledge-
intensive companies. Journal of Management Studies, 37(8), 1101-
1125.

Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gilbert, C. & Bower, J. (2002). Disruptive change: When trying harder is part
of the problem. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 95-101.
Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Greengard, S. (2000). The high cost of cyberslacking. Workforce, 79(12),
22-23.
Guffey, C. & Helms, M. (2001). Effective employee discipline: A case of the
Internal Revenue Service. Public Personnel Management, 30(1), 111-
128.
Hochschild, A. (1983). The Managed Heart. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Horwitz, S. (1996). Improving on a good thing: The growing influence of
improvisation. Back Stage, 37(30), 22-27.
Jacobs, J. & Gerson, K. (2001). Overworked individuals or overworked
families? Work & Occupations, 28(1), 40-64.