Meaningful work denotes a multidimensional construct that encapsulates meaning-making of the environmental and social work context, personal growth, and positive contributions to the greater good (Autin & Allan, 2020; Steger et al., 2012). The present paper adopts a normative lens on meaningful work (Michaelson, 2021). The general premise is that the meaning of work lies within the world and its universal meaning is discovered in the work people craft or engage with in a specific work and sociocultural context (Michaelson, 2021; Rosso et al., 2010). The understanding is that work is a contributor to a meaningful life; work’s meaningfulness is partly independent of whether it is individually experienced or socially perceived as meaningful and worthwhile. Individuals are active agents and arbiters of the meaningfulness of their own work as shaped through the lens of their unique views and experiences of a broader sociocultural context (Autin & Allan, 2020; Barrett & Dailey, 2018; Rosso et al., 2010). Work is viewed as meaningful if it fulfils the need for personal agency in self-expression, growth, creation and mastering, and if it fulfils the need for meaningful communion (i.e. connecting, union, relating) with others (Coetzee, 2021; Steger et al., 2012; Wrzesniewski et al., 2003).

Scholars assert that meaningful work is an outflow from the dynamic interplay between multiple sources of meaning including both personal and sociocultural pathways to meaning-making (Chalofsky, 2003; Jiang, 2021; Rosso et al., 2010). Meaningful work results from the simultaneous interaction of the individual (self-agency) contributing something of value to and unifying with others for a collective, greater good (Rosso et al., 2010). Research shows that meaningful work is important for positive functioning and occupational and general wellbeing, work engagement, job satisfaction, job performance and retention (Allan, Batz, Sterling & Tay, 2019; Autin & Allan, 2020; Jiang, 2021). It stands to reason that gaining an understanding of individuals’ personal and Africanisation (sociocultural) views of the digital era work world may help to uncover personal and sociocultural beliefs and values that serve as important sources of meaningful work.

In the contemporary South African workplace, the notion of “Africanisation” is increasingly emphasised as a sociocultural approach to relational connections at work. Africanisation alludes to a philosophy of African-cultural humanism that are emphasised in the post-apartheid democracy (Vilakati & Schurink, 2021). Africanised views on the work world may cultivate an awareness of collectivist human values that enrich the meaning of work in the multicultural digital-era workspace (Veldsman, 2020). Key values of humanism underpinning the notion of Africanisation include inter alia communal interdependence and belonging, harmony and cooperation and Ubuntu (a spirit of communion, solidarity, respect, togetherness, united culture, caring community: Molose, Thomas & Goldman, 2019; Vilakati & Schurink, 2021). Rosso et al. (2010) and Atitsogbe and Bernaud (2023) view values as important mechanisms associated with how work becomes meaningful. Research on the contemporary psychological contract (Coetzee, 2021) highlights values such as working with others (e.g. positive, collaborative teamwork), self-expression (e.g. creativity, independence, career development) and extrinsic conditions (e.g. finance and job security) as important perceived employer obligations to enhance the meaning of work.

The contemporary technology-enhanced workspace has become an eco-system that includes both traditional and contingent “gig” workers who bring an entrepreneurial spirit to organisational service-delivery (Bricka & Schroeder, 2019). The organisational metaverse (i.e. a virtual-reality online workspace) unites a hybrid and digitally distributed diverse talent pool of workers through meaningful, collaborative digital interactions that are conducive to better productivity, creativity and decision-making (Van Vulpen & Veldsman, 2022).

A global talent trends survey by Bravery et al. (2022) shows that employees increasingly describe their work as being characterised by more balanced work redesigned to allow time for family, hobbies, work, health and learning; digital technology that fuses human creativity with artificial intelligence and automation; cyberteams being the digital “office” to work collaboratively regardless of where they are working; a more empathetic, human centric approach to workers and their needs; thriving in one’s career regardless of where they work; and agency and independence in working globally and digitally where one wants, when one wants and for whomever one wants. Increased flexibility and work-life balance have been cited as important sources of job satisfaction (Van Vulpen & Veldsman, 2022).

The digital era workspace is also characterised by positive-impact business sustainability practices that equally benefit people, society, the environment, the planet and business profit including enhanced equity and a clear unifying organisational purpose that goes beyond shareholder return (Bravery et al., 2022; Howe et al., 2021; Pavez, Kendall & Laszlo, 2021; Van Vulpen & Veldsman, 2022). A survey by Van Vulpen and Veldsman (2022) further shows that workers view technological change and automation as facilitating the creation of more meaningful work with the focus being shifted from repetitive and administrative tasks to higher level cognitive, creative, challenging tasks, greater purpose-driven work and autonomy.

Paradoxically, technology brings diverse talent pools across the globe together via virtual media platforms while also creating a disconnect with the human need for physical interaction, belonging and emotional connection. The work meaning theory of Rosso et al. (2010) indicates relational connections at work as an important source of employees’ work meaning. In the digital-era, organisations and employees need to find ways of harnessing employee energy for the collective good which involves a new way of partnering that is more human-centric, relatable and attuned to the digital-era workspace (Bravery et al., 2022).

Research links employees’ connections to work groups to the meaning of work (Grant, Dutton & Rosso, 2008; Rosso et al., 2010; Wrzensniewski et al., 2003). This may be because work generally involves employees who are members of many groups and communities, including work teams and professional networks that are engaged in a common activity or share a common goal or identity. Organisations help shape the meaning of work by providing a space for forging stronger ties to larger work communities. Psychological identification with a work community and negotiating work-family boundaries function as determinants of work meanings (Rosso et al., 2010; Way, 2020).

The normative lens adopted in the present paper highlights the importance of interrogating not only individuals’ subjective, self-oriented views of work in the digital era work world, but also their views about the social (other-oriented) nature of work as impacted by the larger environmental context (Michaelson, 2021). Rosso et al. (2010) further suggest a coherent integration of self-oriented and other-oriented work views to illuminate core pathways or mechanisms that may inform the creation of meaningful work. To this end, we posed two open-ended research questions for study participants:

Research question 1: What is your personal philosophy about the digital era world of work?

Research question 2: What is your personal Africanisation views on the digital era world of work?

It was assumed that requesting a “personal philosophy” would elicit participants’ understanding of, and beliefs about the digital era work world, their place within it and what they regard is important in work and working. A personal philosophy generally reflects a set of beliefs, values and principles that individuals use to evaluate information and respond to people and situations (Crespo, 2021; Dudley, 2018). In the present study, the question about “Africanisation” was seen to represent important “other-oriented” sociocultural work views relevant to the South African post-apartheid, multiculturally diverse work context. To ensure that the participants had the same understanding of the term “Africanisation”, the following explanatory note was included: personal views based on African philosophy or world view.

We invited undergraduate students pursuing further studies in the economic and management sciences field at a South African comprehensive open distance learning higher education university. We decided on the South African services industry as research setting because these students are generally in some form of employment in the services industry and exposed to the contemporary technology-driven work world. Their higher educational background further informed their knowledge of the world of work. The university also had a strong drive towards Africanisation in the curriculum.

The researchers were subject matter experts who adopted an objective, neutral role in the data collection, analyses and interpretation to avoid biasness in the presentation and discussion of the findings (Khan, 2014).

A randomly chosen sample of (N = 486) undergraduate students participated in the study. The sample comprised of predominant Black African (72%) students (male: 35%; female: 65%) who were in some form of employment. The mean age of the sample was 34 years (SD = 9.12; age range 25–55 years). The sample was further represented by participants from a Coloured (7%), Indian (5%) and White (16%) racial origin.

Students received an invitation via an email from a “noreply” student system administrator with an URL link to the online open-ended questionnaire. This approach ensured anonymous participation, objectivity and unbiasness in the data collection and analysis.

The data was captured on an Excell spreadsheet and stored by the primary researcher in an online, password-protected folder.

Considering the large sample, researcher triangulation was applied to ensure the rigour, validity and credibility of data analyses and interpretation (Creswell, 2013). In agreement with grounded theory, an inductive data analysis strategy was applied which involved constructing analytic codes and thematic categories that emerged from the data (Kahn, 2014). The researchers were subject matter experts and analysed the data manually. To minimise the risk of potential biasness, the three researchers followed an inductive, reiterative process to data coding through a process of recurring discussions which involved in-depth clarifications and comparisons, going back to the text to verify insights and then reconvening.

A constant comparative methodology was applied (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) whereby each researcher first independently studied the data several times to gain an overall impression of the responses. The researchers then met to discuss and compare the emerging higher order and subthemes with supporting evidence (responses) of general patterns observed. A process of open coding was used to manually establish an initial list of codes for significant responses that provided a rich understanding of the research questions (Al-Asfour et al., 2021; Creswell, 2013). The researchers had repeated discussions about the initial codes and reread the response data to search for similarities and dissimilarities across the theoretical themes. The process assisted in conceptually clustering and breaking down subthemes with supporting response data. The reiterative process was repeated as necessary until researcher consensus was reached and the core overarching higher order themes and subthemes became sufficiently refined for interpretation and theory development. The reiterative process also allowed for the researchers’ interpretations to be triangulated. The principle of meaning saturation (i.e. the point at which no further dimensions and insights were identified) was applied to establish the final list of core themes (Vasileiou, Barnett, Thorpe & Young, 2018).

Table 1 and Table 2 summarise the outcome of the core identified themes.

Drawing from the guidelines of Nowell, Norris, White & Moules (2017), trustworthiness of the study was ensured by means of keeping a record of the research process, the data coding, labelling and derivation of higher order and subthemes. Trustworthiness alluded to ensuring credibility through researcher triangulation, transferability through thick descriptions, dependability through quality documentation and record keeping of the data analysis process, confirmability by providing response evidence for the established themes and explanations for interpretations (Nowell et al., 2017). Employing strategies to warrant the trustworthiness of the research methodology was deemed important for ensuring data quality, integrity and transferability.

The research ethics review and permission committees of the university (#2020_CEMS-IOP_031) provided approval for the study. The participants provided informed consent for the use of the data for research purposes. Participation was anonymous and voluntary. The responses were collected as anonymous group-based data. Responses could thus not be traced back to an individual respondent and as such participants’ privacy and confidentiality were ensured.

Practically, the findings highlight the importance of organisations in providing community for workers who draw meanings and psychosocial resources from collaborative group memberships (Rosso et al., 2010). The digital-driven workspace of the contemporary work world calls for an organisational culture and climate that workers can relate to. A social-moral organisational climate characterised by trust-based, respectful and cooperative relations, and human-centric supportive organisational practices enables greater meaningful work (Lysova, Allan, Dik, Duffy & Steger, 2019). Employers can invest in enhanced collaboration technology that create a safe, compassionate environment to share concerns and needs. Employers should further invest in flexible work-life options and collaboration training for workers that raise sensitivity toward values of African humanism when engaging virtually with others. Digital techniques such as virtual team dialogues and focus groups, pulse surveys, employee resource groups and networks can help employers understand the values and needs that facilitate the meaning of work for employees. Employers can engage in strategies that redefine contractual agreements to manage expectations and needs that define the meaning of work. Expectations for work models, ways of working and communicating digitally to empower workers must be clear (Bravery et al., 2022).

The qualitative design of the study limits the relevance, and thus generalisability, of the findings to the larger population. The findings should be interpreted in the context of the research setting, sample of participants and the researchers’ understanding of the subject matter and themes. Future research should consider replicating the research across various occupational, gender and racial groups in various industries and research settings. Quantitative studies could further contribute to the actual measurement of workers’ sense of work meaningfulness in digitally enhanced workspaces.