This mixed-method investigation examines the nature, prevalence, and correlates of mansplaining in modern workplaces. In Study 1, we scrape Twitter and conduct a thematic analysis of 2,312 tweets. These findings ground a comprehensive definition of mansplaining and propose six items for measurement. In Study 2, we quantitatively investigate mansplaining experiences at work (n = 499), finding that almost every participant had experienced mansplaining in the previous year. Expected gender differences emerged among mansplaining perpetrators and targets, yet men were not the only perpetrators, nor were women the only targets. Confirmatory factor analysis results support the possibility that mansplaining is a second factor of incivility. Further, mansplaining predicted significant variance in outcomes such as job satisfaction and turnover intentions above and beyond incivility. This research underscores that mansplaining is more than a social media phenomenon. Rather, it is a form of gendered mistreatment with implications for scholars and practitioners alike.

The current study investigated employees' weekly responses to experienced job insecurity. Based on appraisal theory, it was postulated that employees may adopt three coping strategies in response to job insecurity (i.e., remaining silent, adapting, or being proactive) in order to maintain or improve their weekly well-being. We introduced a multilevel moderated mediation model, explaining how weekly job insecurity would be related to well-being in the following weeks through these three behaviors. We also expected that subordinate emotional regulation and supervisor prosocial motivation (both defined as trait variables) would function as contextual factors moderating the relationships of job insecurity with employee behavior and well-being. A 5-week diary study of 149 subordinates partially supported the model. The results showed longitudinal conditional indirect effects of job insecurity on subordinate well-being depending on subordinate emotional regulation style and supervisor prosocial motivation. In doing so, the study offers two main contributions to the job insecurity literature. First, employees are not passive responders to perceived job insecurity, but active shapers through coping depending on the context. Subordinates' emotional regulation strategy and supervisors' prosocial motivation, as trait variables, impact on how subordinates respond to perceived job insecurity over weeks. From a practical point of view, the dynamic nature of perceived job insecurity suggests implications for interventions to maintain subordinates' well-being.

Contemporary organisations continue to use flexible workspace configurations and increasingly are adopting more automated and intelligent digital systems to organise work. Workspace configurations have various forms and arrangements composed of the physical workspace (such as open-plan office spaces) and virtual workspace (e.g., teleworking). The aim of this Special Issue (SI) is to stimulate inquiry into the role of management, organisation and HRM in promoting mutual gains for employers and employees working in these environments. The essence of mutual gains is that HRM practices lead to greater employee well-being and increased employee performance, the latter being especially important to employers for achieving organisational goals. In ‘managing physical and virtual work environments during the Covid-19 pandemic’, we consider how work is organised in challenging physical and virtual workspace configurations as well as how people engage in activities that are paced and informed by automated and digital technologies. Our aim is to encourage exciting research on the role and implementation of management, organisation and HRM in physical and virtual workspace configurations, stimulate new scholarly discussions on the topic, and increase understanding of the application of new technology systems and tools. A specific objective of this SI is therefore to increase academic knowledge on the opportunities and challenges faced by employees working in different physical and virtual workspace conditions, and consider the consequences for employee well-being (Guest, 2017; Van De Voorde, Paauwe, & Van Veldhoven, 2012).