Search

Purpose: The aim of this article is to identify the relationship between the use of intuition in decision-making and the intensity of an individual's high sensitivity. This study aims to fill the research gap regarding the integration of the constructs of intuition in decision-making and the issue of highly sensitive persons. Design/methodology/approach: In order to operationalise the constructs analysed in the theoretical part of the article, validated research tools developed in previous empirical studies conducted in this area were used. The intuition construct consisted of 14 items representing statements describing behavior typical of people who use intuition or rational analysis in the decision-making process. To measure an individual's level of sensitivity, the High Sensitivity Scale developed was used, which consists of 27 items (questions) relating to the characteristics of highly sensitive persons. Data collected from 338 respondents was analysed using a least- squares regression modelling approach. Findings: The results show that a higher intensity of the positive aspects of high sensitivity decreases the level of use of intuition in decision-making processes. An inverse relationship was identified for the negative aspects of high sensitivity, i.e. a higher intensity of these characteristics translates into a higher level of the use of intuition. It has also been proven that highly sensitives managers tend to use intuition more frequently in their decision-making process than rational analysis. These results contribute to a better understanding of the phenomenon of the use of intuition in decision-making processes by HSPs. Research limitations/implications: In terms of measuring both intuition and high sensitivity, the main problem was that the measurement was based on the respondent's self-assessment, which can lead to distortions due to personal bias or the desire to present oneself in a better light. Furthermore, the limitations of the research process are also associated with the sample size. A final limitation indicating directions for further research is the adoption of a quantitative approach. This involves a lack of control of external factors, and therefore the results may not be very accurate. Originality/value: The value of the work comes from its potential to provide new insights into how personality traits can influence intuitive decision-making, which may have practical applications in psychology and management. This article makes an important contribution to the understanding of intuitive mechanisms in context of highly sensitive persons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this article is to assess the impact of advantages and disadvantages (ADV & DISADV) of remote work on employees’ subjective well-being (SWB). Design/methodology/approach: In order to operationalise the constructs analysed in the theoretical part of the article, validated research tools were used. The SWB construct consisted of 24 items representing three dimensions: psychological, physical health, and relationships. To measure ADV and DISADV of remote work a tool consisting of 14 items was used, representing two dimensions. Data collected from 322 respondents was analysed using Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) approach. Findings: The results show that remote work ADV positively influence employees' SWB, with the impact strength being noted in the following dimensions: physical health, psychological well-being, and relationships. Thus, the influence of remote work ADV is highest for employees' SWB in the relationships dimension. On the other hand, remote work DISADV negatively influence employees' SWB, but only in the relationships dimension, with the impact being minimal. Our research also shows that employees who work partially remotely (hybrid workers) assess their well-being, with the exception of physical health, as better than those who work fully remotely. Moreover, our findings suggest that employees who hold a managerial role report a higher level of well-being than others. Research limitations/implications: To assess the ADV and DISADV of remote work and employees’ SWB, the primary methodological challenge was the reliance on self-reported data, which is susceptible to distortions from personal biases and social desirability effects. Additionally, the research process faced limitations related to the sample size and the concucted survey captures only a given moment in remote workers’ reality. Another significant limitation, suggesting directions for future research, is the current research design. The adopted approach does not take into account objective/external factors for well-being, potentially compromising the accuracy of the findings. Originality/value: The value of the work comes from its potential to provide new insights into how ADV and DISADV of remote work influence on employees’ SWB. This article makes an important contribution to the understanding the phenomenos of employees’ SWB in the context of ADV and DISADV of remote work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]