Workplace Entitlement, Cognitive Load, and Virtual Team Cohesion in Selected Industrial Institutions in Quezon City: Basis for Focus Teams Intervention Program
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23296514Keywords:
workplace entitlement, cognitive load, virtual team cohesion, virtual work, hybrid work, FOCUS TeamsAbstract
This study assessed workplace entitlement, cognitive load, and virtual team cohesion among employees in selected industrial institutions in Quezon City and used the findings as the basis for the FOCUS Teams intervention program. A quantitative descriptive-correlational design was employed among 393 respondents purposively selected from a population of 1,836 employees representing top management, middle management, and rank-and-file personnel engaged in virtual or hybrid work in five institutions. A researcher-developed six-part questionnaire was content-validated by Industrial Psychology, management, and research experts and pilot-tested among 23 comparable participants, yielding Cronbach’s alpha of .82. Percentage, weighted mean, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson product-moment correlation, and multiple regression were used. Workplace entitlement was highly evident (overall WM = 4.37), cognitive load was very high (WM = 4.49), and virtual team cohesion was very high (WM = 4.56). The three groups did not differ significantly in their workplace-entitlement assessments. Significant positive relationships were found between workplace entitlement and cognitive load (r = .714, p = .003), workplace entitlement and virtual team cohesion (r = .582, p = .018), and cognitive load and virtual team cohesion (r = .636, p = .009). Workplace entitlement and cognitive load jointly predicted virtual team cohesion, R = .586, R² = .340, adjusted R² = .336, F(2, 369) = 95.05, p < .001. The most prominent challenges involved mental exhaustion from prolonged digital communication, delayed responses, information overload, task switching, and coordination. The proposed FOCUS Teams program was rated highly suitable (WM = 4.68), highly acceptable (WM = 4.61), and highly feasible (WM = 4.54), supporting its potential use for cognitive readiness, communication clarity, fair workplace expectations, and virtual-team development.
Downloads
References
Abeysekera, I., Sunga, E., Gonzales, A., & David, R. (2024). The effect of cognitive load on learning memory of online learning accounting students in the Philippines. Sustainability, 16(4), 1686. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16041686
Bizri, R. M., & Kertechian, S. K. (2024). Investigating the link between psychological entitlement and workplace deviance: Moderations and post hoc analysis. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 32(10), 2177–2204. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-07-2023-3848
Caguiat, M. R. R., & Gallardo, M. O. B. (2025). Virtual team challenges during COVID-19 pandemic. NRCP Research Journal, 24(1), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.63225/nrcp.rj.2025.0024
Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., & Bushman, B. J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8301_04
Chaudhary, M., Chopra, S., & Kaur, J. (2022). Cohesion as a cardinal antecedent in virtual team performance: A meta-analysis. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 28(5–6), 398–414. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-02-2022-0017
Cross, R., Rebele, R., & Grant, A. (2016). Collaborative overload. Harvard Business Review, 94(1), 74–79.
Du, X., Chowdhury, M. S., & Kang, D.-S. (2024). Antecedents of feedback-seeking behavior and its conditional impacts: Applying the framework of workplace entitlement. SAGE Open, 14(2), 21582440241257675. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241257675
Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Flick, U. (2020). Introducing research methodology: Thinking your way through your research project (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Rey, G. D., Sanchez-Stockhammer, C., & Schneider, S. (2023). Development and validation of a theory-based questionnaire to measure different types of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 35, Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09738-0
Langerud, D. H., & Jordan, P. J. (2020). Entitlement at work: Linking positive behaviors to employee entitlement. Journal of Management & Organization, 26(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2018.33
Moore, D. S., McCabe, G. P., & Craig, B. A. (2020). Introduction to the practice of statistics (10th ed.). W. H. Freeman/Macmillan Learning.
Piotrowski, P., & Besta, T. (2022). Employee entitlement: Is there a universal approach that we can use in the organizational settings? Roczniki Psychologiczne, 25(3), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych2022.0014
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.
Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2022). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Tavoletti, E., Florea, L., Taras, V., Şahin, F., Çetin, F., & Celik, D. A. (2025). Cohesion and performance in global virtual teams: The moderating role of technical skills. European Journal of International Management, 26(3–4), 621–649. https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2025.146842
Zaheer, H., Karim, J., & Bibi, Z. (2022). Actions dictate the consequences: Workplace incivility, knowledge hiding, and psychological entitlement. Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies, 8(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.26710/jbsee.v8i1.2114
Zeitlhofer, I., Zumbach, J., & Schweppe, J. (2024). Complexity affects performance, cognitive load, and awareness. Learning and Instruction, 94, 102001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
