Abstract
This dissertation examines whether policy commitments regarding the right to disconnect from work translate into tangible reductions in employee stress and improvements in productivity. Employing a systematic literature synthesis methodology, this study analyses peer-reviewed empirical research, policy evaluations, and comparative legal frameworks from multiple jurisdictions including France, Australia, Kuwait, and Vietnam. The findings reveal that hyperconnectivity and after-hours work communication are consistently associated with elevated stress, burnout, and work–family conflict. Right-to-disconnect policies, when genuinely implemented and culturally embedded, demonstrate meaningful reductions in burnout (up to 25%) and modest improvements in engagement and productivity (approximately 12%). However, the mere existence of formal policies proves insufficient; organisational culture, managerial support, and flexibility in implementation emerge as critical determinants of success. Australian evidence indicates that 58% of employers reported positive effects on engagement following right-to-disconnect legislation. The dissertation concludes that policy commitments must be accompanied by genuine enforcement mechanisms, supportive supervision, and cultural transformation to achieve their intended outcomes. Future research should prioritise longitudinal studies examining long-term effects across diverse occupational contexts.
Introduction
The proliferation of digital communication technologies has fundamentally transformed the contemporary workplace, dissolving traditional boundaries between professional and personal life. Smartphones, email, instant messaging platforms, and cloud-based collaborative tools have enabled unprecedented flexibility in work arrangements, yet this technological advancement has simultaneously created expectations of constant availability that extend far beyond conventional working hours. This phenomenon, increasingly termed ‘hyperconnectivity’, has precipitated significant concerns regarding employee wellbeing, mental health, and the sustainability of modern work practices.
The right to disconnect represents an emerging legal and organisational response to these concerns, granting employees the entitlement to disengage from work-related electronic communications outside their designated working hours without facing adverse consequences. France pioneered legislative intervention in this domain in 2017, requiring companies with more than 50 employees to negotiate agreements establishing periods during which employees are not expected to send or respond to work communications. Subsequently, numerous jurisdictions including Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Ireland, and most recently Australia have enacted similar provisions, reflecting growing international recognition of the need to protect employees from the deleterious effects of digital overwork.
This topic assumes considerable academic, social, and practical significance for multiple reasons. Academically, it sits at the intersection of labour law, organisational psychology, human resource management, and public health, necessitating interdisciplinary analysis to fully comprehend its implications. Socially, the increasing prevalence of stress-related mental health conditions, including anxiety and depression, linked to workplace pressures represents a substantial public health concern. The World Health Organization has formally recognised burnout as an occupational phenomenon, underscoring the urgency of addressing workplace stressors (World Health Organization, 2019). Practically, organisations face mounting pressure to balance operational demands with employee wellbeing, whilst policymakers must evaluate whether legislative interventions achieve their intended objectives or merely impose bureaucratic burdens without substantive benefit.
The transition to remote and hybrid working arrangements, accelerated dramatically by the COVID-19 pandemic, has intensified these debates. Boundaries between home and office have become increasingly porous, with many employees reporting difficulty in establishing clear demarcations between work and personal time. Research consistently indicates that this boundary erosion contributes to heightened stress, diminished recovery from work demands, and compromised work–family balance. Against this backdrop, the right to disconnect has emerged as a potentially important mechanism for protecting employee wellbeing whilst maintaining organisational effectiveness.
However, considerable uncertainty persists regarding whether formal policy commitments translate into meaningful practical outcomes. Critics argue that legislative provisions may prove symbolic rather than substantive, particularly where enforcement mechanisms remain weak or organisational cultures continue to reward constant availability. This dissertation therefore addresses a fundamental question confronting policymakers, organisations, and employees alike: do right-to-disconnect policies genuinely reduce stress and support productivity, or do they represent well-intentioned but ultimately ineffective interventions?
Aim and objectives
The primary aim of this dissertation is to critically evaluate whether policy commitments regarding the right to disconnect translate into demonstrable reductions in employee stress and improvements in productivity outcomes.
To achieve this aim, the following specific objectives have been established:
1. To examine the empirical evidence regarding the relationship between hyperconnectivity, after-hours work communication, and employee stress, burnout, and wellbeing.
2. To analyse existing right-to-disconnect legislative frameworks and organisational policies across multiple jurisdictions, identifying common features and variations in approach.
3. To evaluate the empirical evidence regarding the effects of right-to-disconnect policies on stress reduction, burnout prevention, and work–life balance.
4. To assess the impact of right-to-disconnect initiatives on productivity, employee engagement, and organisational outcomes.
5. To identify the conditions and contextual factors that determine whether policy commitments translate into practical outcomes, including the role of organisational culture, managerial support, and implementation mechanisms.
6. To provide evidence-based recommendations for policymakers and organisations seeking to implement effective right-to-disconnect provisions.
Methodology
This dissertation employs a systematic literature synthesis methodology, integrating empirical findings, policy evaluations, and theoretical perspectives from peer-reviewed academic sources. This approach is particularly appropriate given the relatively nascent state of empirical research on right-to-disconnect policies and the need to synthesise evidence across diverse jurisdictional contexts and methodological traditions.
The literature search strategy encompassed multiple academic databases including Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, supplemented by targeted searches of specialist journals in labour law, organisational behaviour, and occupational health. Search terms included combinations of ‘right to disconnect’, ‘after-hours work’, ‘work–life balance’, ‘burnout’, ‘telepressure’, ‘digital detox’, and ‘workplace connectivity’. The search was not restricted by date but prioritised recent publications (2018–2025) given the contemporary nature of legislative developments in this field.
Inclusion criteria required sources to be peer-reviewed empirical studies, systematic reviews, or policy analyses published in reputable academic journals. Studies were required to address directly either the effects of hyperconnectivity on employee outcomes or the implementation and impacts of right-to-disconnect policies. Sources were excluded if they comprised opinion pieces, blog posts, or non-peer-reviewed commentary, ensuring the synthesis rested upon high-quality evidence.
The synthesis followed a thematic analysis approach, with findings organised according to the key outcome domains of stress and burnout, work–life balance, productivity and engagement, and implementation factors. This structure facilitated systematic comparison across studies and identification of areas of consensus and disagreement within the literature.
Methodological quality was assessed through consideration of study design, sample characteristics, measurement approaches, and potential sources of bias. Whilst the synthesis primarily aggregates findings narratively given the heterogeneity of included studies, attention was paid to the strength of evidence underlying different conclusions.
It should be acknowledged that this methodology carries inherent limitations. The reliance upon published literature may introduce publication bias, with null or negative findings potentially underrepresented. The diversity of jurisdictional contexts, policy designs, and outcome measures complicates direct comparison across studies. Furthermore, the relatively recent implementation of right-to-disconnect legislation in many jurisdictions means that long-term outcome data remain limited.
Literature review
Hyperconnectivity and employee wellbeing
The relationship between technological connectivity and employee wellbeing has attracted substantial research attention over the past decade. Contemporary work environments increasingly feature what scholars term ‘always-on’ cultures, characterised by expectations of perpetual availability and responsiveness to work communications regardless of time or location. This hyperconnectivity has been consistently identified as a significant occupational stressor with adverse implications for mental health and recovery processes.
Empirical research demonstrates robust associations between after-hours work communication and negative wellbeing outcomes. Hyperconnectivity and expectations of constant availability are linked to elevated levels of burnout, psychological stress, and work–family conflict. The mechanisms underlying these associations involve the disruption of recovery processes essential for maintaining psychological and physiological equilibrium. When employees remain cognitively engaged with work concerns during non-work time, they are unable to achieve the psychological detachment necessary for effective recovery from daily work demands (Hopkins, 2024; Bergen and Bressler, 2019; Mattern, 2020).
The concept of ‘telepressure’ has emerged as a particularly useful construct for understanding these dynamics. Telepressure refers to the preoccupation with and urge to respond immediately to work-related electronic communications, regardless of context or timing. Research indicates that telepressure operates as a significant pathway through which communication technology contributes to burnout and compromised wellbeing. Importantly, telepressure appears driven not merely by objective communication volumes but by perceived expectations and normative pressures within organisational contexts (Barber, Santuzzi and Hu, 2023).
Work–family conflict represents another crucial outcome domain adversely affected by hyperconnectivity. The intrusion of work demands into family and personal time undermines role functioning in non-work domains, generating conflict and dissatisfaction. Research consistently demonstrates that employees experiencing high levels of after-hours work contact report diminished satisfaction with family relationships and personal life quality. These effects appear particularly pronounced among employees with significant family responsibilities, including parents of young children and those with caring obligations.
Right-to-disconnect legislation and policy frameworks
The recognition of hyperconnectivity as a significant occupational hazard has prompted legislative and policy responses across numerous jurisdictions. France established the foundational legislative model in 2017, incorporating right-to-disconnect provisions within its Labour Code. The French approach mandates that companies with more than 50 employees negotiate agreements establishing modalities for employee disconnection, though it stops short of prescribing specific prohibited hours or creating individual enforcement rights.
Subsequent legislative developments have occurred across Europe and beyond. Spain incorporated right-to-disconnect provisions within its 2018 data protection legislation. Portugal enacted provisions in 2021 explicitly prohibiting employers from contacting employees outside working hours except in emergencies. Belgium introduced comprehensive right-to-disconnect legislation in 2022 covering federal public sector employees, subsequently extended to private sector workers. Ireland established a code of practice on the right to disconnect in 2021, creating enforceable obligations whilst allowing flexibility in implementation approaches.
Australia represents the most significant recent addition to jurisdictions adopting right-to-disconnect legislation, with provisions taking effect under the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes) Act 2024. The Australian approach grants employees the right to refuse to monitor, read, or respond to contact from employers outside working hours unless such refusal is unreasonable. This formulation balances employee protection with recognition of legitimate organisational needs in specified circumstances (Josserand and Boersma, 2024; Livori, 2025).
Legal scholars have framed the right to disconnect as an emerging digital labour right, situated within broader frameworks of decent work and fundamental workplace protections. This conceptualisation links right-to-disconnect provisions to international labour standards and human rights frameworks, including the International Labour Organization’s decent work agenda. The right to disconnect is positioned as essential to protecting rest time, health, and work–life balance in an era of pervasive digital connectivity (Lagutina, 2022; Wahab et al., 2025).
Beyond legislative mandates, many organisations have implemented voluntary right-to-disconnect policies as elements of broader wellbeing strategies. These organisational initiatives range from explicit prohibitions on after-hours email to automated email delay functions, designated communication blackout periods, and training programmes addressing boundary management. The diversity of approaches reflects varying organisational contexts, workforce preferences, and cultural norms regarding work–life boundaries.
Effects on stress, burnout, and mental health
The fundamental premise underlying right-to-disconnect initiatives is that reducing after-hours work contact will ameliorate stress and protect mental health. Empirical evidence provides substantial support for this premise, though outcomes depend critically upon implementation quality and contextual factors.
Policy analyses indicate that right-to-disconnect initiatives, when effectively implemented, contribute to reduced burnout and improved psychological wellbeing. The mechanisms involve enabling genuine psychological detachment from work during non-work periods, thereby facilitating recovery processes essential for maintaining health and sustaining performance capacity. Reduced exposure to work stressors during evenings, weekends, and holidays permits replenishment of depleted cognitive and emotional resources (Nirmala, Djamil and Andaningsih, 2025; Pansu, 2018; Alkandari, Baroun and Alboloushi, 2025; Mattern, 2020; Wahab and Rahman, 2025).
A quantitative study conducted within multinational corporations implementing comprehensive digital detox and right-to-disconnect measures reported burnout reductions of approximately 25% among participating employees. This substantial effect size suggests that well-designed interventions can meaningfully address the mental health burden associated with hyperconnectivity. The study identified supportive supervision and integrated implementation approaches as critical success factors (Nirmala, Djamil and Andaningsih, 2025).
Research conducted within the Kuwaiti public sector examined job demands, burnout, and wellbeing among female teachers, providing insights into right-to-disconnect effects within non-Western contexts. The findings highlighted that enforcing disconnection entitlements and enhancing supervisory support represented key levers for preventing burnout and promoting wellbeing. This research underscores the particular vulnerability of certain occupational groups, including educators, to after-hours work demands and the importance of sector-specific implementation strategies (Alkandari, Baroun and Alboloushi, 2025).
However, the mere existence of formal policies proves insufficient to achieve stress reduction objectives. Research examining workplace telepressure found that having a formal disconnection policy in place did not, in itself, reduce telepressure or associated strain. Rather, implicit norms and cultural expectations regarding responsiveness proved more predictive of stress outcomes than formal policy provisions. This finding emphasises that policy commitments must be accompanied by genuine cultural change to achieve their intended effects (Barber, Santuzzi and Hu, 2023).
Effects on productivity and organisational outcomes
A significant concern regarding right-to-disconnect policies involves their potential effects on productivity and organisational performance. Critics suggest that limiting after-hours communication could impede operational flexibility, delay decision-making, and reduce responsiveness to client or customer needs. Empirical evidence, however, generally contradicts these concerns, indicating that well-implemented policies are associated with neutral to positive productivity outcomes.
The multinational corporation study examining digital detox and right-to-disconnect measures reported not only reduced burnout but also enhanced engagement and productivity improvements of approximately 12%. These gains were attributed to improved recovery from work demands, enhanced focus during working hours, and increased motivation arising from perceptions of organisational support for wellbeing (Nirmala, Djamil and Andaningsih, 2025).
Early evidence following Australia’s right-to-disconnect legislation indicates predominantly positive employer perceptions of outcomes. Survey data reveal that 58% of Australian employers reported positive effects on employee engagement and productivity following implementation, whilst only 4% reported negative effects. The substantial majority of employers perceiving benefits suggests that concerns regarding productivity impairment may be overstated, at least when policies are implemented appropriately (Livori, 2025).
Evaluation of French right-to-disconnect legislation presents a more nuanced picture. Whilst employees widely believed the legislation improved rest and wellbeing, limited practical implementation meant no clear perceived productivity gains had materialised at the time of assessment. This finding highlights the gap between policy intent and practical outcomes, suggesting that legislative provisions alone are insufficient to drive organisational change (Pansu, 2018).
Theoretical arguments supporting productivity benefits emphasise that overwork and inadequate recovery ultimately undermine performance capacity. Fatigued, stressed employees demonstrate diminished cognitive function, reduced creativity, and elevated error rates. By protecting recovery time, right-to-disconnect policies may paradoxically enhance productivity by ensuring employees return to work refreshed and capable of optimal performance. Reduced stress-related absenteeism represents an additional pathway through which disconnection policies may support organisational outcomes (Hopkins, 2024; Josserand and Boersma, 2024; Bergen and Bressler, 2019; Thang, 2025).
Implementation factors and conditions for success
The evidence reviewed consistently indicates that the translation of policy commitments into practical outcomes depends upon implementation quality and contextual conditions. Several factors emerge as particularly significant determinants of success.
Managerial behaviour and supervisory support represent critical elements in achieving genuine disconnection. Managers serve as role models whose own communication behaviours signal acceptable norms within work units. Supervisors who themselves send after-hours communications implicitly convey expectations of availability, regardless of formal policy provisions. Conversely, supervisors who respect boundaries and actively discourage after-hours contact create environments conducive to genuine disconnection. Training programmes addressing boundary management for both supervisors and employees enhance implementation effectiveness (Alkandari, Baroun and Alboloushi, 2025; Varela-Castro, De Los Angeles Briceño-Santacruz and Castro-Solano, 2022).
Organisational culture represents a more diffuse but equally important influence on outcomes. Cultures characterised by ‘always-on’ expectations, implicit valorisation of overwork, and competitive pressures towards constant availability undermine policy effectiveness regardless of formal provisions. Cultural change requires sustained attention to norms, values, and reward systems, extending well beyond policy announcements. Organisations achieving genuine transformation typically combine formal policies with comprehensive communication campaigns, leadership commitment, and alignment of performance management systems with disconnection objectives.
The design of policies themselves influences outcomes. Research suggests that flexible, tailored approaches prove more effective than rigid, one-size-fits-all prescriptions. Employee preferences regarding work timing and boundary management vary considerably based on individual circumstances, role demands, and personal preferences. Policies permitting individual customisation within organisational frameworks may better accommodate this diversity than blanket prohibitions. However, flexibility must be balanced against the risk that individual ‘choices’ to remain connected reflect implicit pressure rather than genuine preference (Lagutina, 2022; Bergen and Bressler, 2019; Mattern, 2020).
Enforcement mechanisms represent a significant challenge for both legislative and organisational policies. French experience demonstrates that legislative provisions lacking robust enforcement fail to achieve meaningful behavioural change. Organisational policies face similar challenges, as employees may perceive formal provisions as merely symbolic whilst experiencing continued pressure to respond to after-hours communications. Effective enforcement requires clear procedures, accessible complaint mechanisms, and genuine consequences for violations.
Discussion
The synthesis of evidence presented in this dissertation permits several significant conclusions regarding whether right-to-disconnect policy commitments translate into reduced stress and improved productivity. The findings carry important implications for policymakers, organisations, and future research directions.
Addressing the first objective, the evidence unequivocally demonstrates that hyperconnectivity and after-hours work communication are associated with adverse employee outcomes. The consistency of findings across multiple studies, diverse methodologies, and varied jurisdictional contexts strengthens confidence in this conclusion. Stress, burnout, and work–family conflict emerge as robust correlates of expectations for constant availability. These findings establish the rationale for policy intervention and confirm that addressing after-hours connectivity represents a legitimate target for workplace wellbeing initiatives.
With respect to the second objective, the analysis reveals considerable variation in legislative approaches to right-to-disconnect provisions across jurisdictions. France’s pioneering model emphasising negotiated agreements has been supplemented by more prescriptive approaches in jurisdictions such as Portugal, whilst Australia’s recent legislation balances employee protection with employer flexibility through its ‘unreasonable refusal’ formulation. Despite these variations, common features include recognition of employee entitlement to disconnect, requirements for employer engagement with the issue, and linkage to broader wellbeing and work–life balance objectives. The diversity of approaches provides natural experiments for evaluating differential effectiveness.
The third objective concerning effects on stress and burnout finds substantial empirical support. Well-implemented right-to-disconnect initiatives demonstrate meaningful reductions in burnout, with one study reporting effects approaching 25%. The mechanisms appear to involve restoration of recovery opportunities during non-work time, enabling replenishment of depleted resources. However, the evidence consistently indicates that formal policies alone prove insufficient. Cultural change, managerial support, and genuine enforcement emerge as necessary conditions for achieving stress reduction objectives. The finding that having a formal disconnection policy did not independently reduce telepressure represents a particularly important contribution, redirecting attention from policy provisions to implementation realities.
Productivity outcomes, addressed by the fourth objective, present a more nuanced picture but ultimately support the conclusion that well-implemented policies are associated with neutral to positive effects. The 12% productivity improvement reported in multinational corporations and the 58% positive employer perception rate in Australian data counter concerns that disconnection policies necessarily impair organisational effectiveness. The French experience, however, demonstrates that productivity gains require genuine implementation rather than merely legislative enactment. Theoretical arguments regarding the counterproductive nature of overwork and the performance benefits of adequate recovery provide plausible mechanisms for observed positive effects.
The fifth objective regarding implementation conditions finds rich support in the literature. Managerial behaviour, organisational culture, policy flexibility, and enforcement mechanisms emerge as critical determinants of success. This finding carries significant practical implications, suggesting that organisations and policymakers must attend to implementation processes rather than assuming that policy announcements will automatically generate desired outcomes. The emphasis on implicit norms and expectations over formal provisions represents a particularly valuable insight, highlighting the importance of cultural transformation alongside structural intervention.
These findings collectively address the overarching research aim. Policy commitments regarding the right to disconnect do translate into reduced stress and improved productivity, but only conditionally. The conditions involve genuine implementation, cultural embedding, managerial support, and appropriate flexibility. Where these conditions are met, evidence supports meaningful benefits for both employee wellbeing and organisational outcomes. Where policy commitments remain symbolic or superficial, effects are likely to be minimal or absent.
Several limitations of the evidence base warrant acknowledgement. Many studies rely upon self-report measures subject to common method bias. Cross-sectional designs predominate, limiting causal inference. Sample characteristics vary considerably, with some studies focusing on specific sectors or occupational groups whose experiences may not generalise broadly. The recency of much legislation means that long-term outcome data remain unavailable. These limitations indicate the need for continued research as implementation experience accumulates.
The implications of these findings extend beyond academic interest to inform practical policy and organisational decision-making. For policymakers, the evidence supports continued development of right-to-disconnect legislation whilst emphasising that legislative provisions must be accompanied by adequate enforcement mechanisms and guidance on implementation. For organisations, the findings suggest that voluntary policies can achieve meaningful benefits but require comprehensive approaches addressing culture, management practices, and accountability alongside formal provisions. For employees, the evidence validates concerns regarding hyperconnectivity whilst indicating that advocacy for genuine implementation rather than merely symbolic policies is warranted.
Conclusions
This dissertation has critically evaluated whether policy commitments regarding the right to disconnect translate into demonstrable reductions in employee stress and improvements in productivity. Through systematic synthesis of empirical evidence, policy analyses, and theoretical perspectives, the stated objectives have been substantially achieved.
The evidence confirms that hyperconnectivity poses genuine risks to employee wellbeing, establishing clear rationale for policy intervention. Right-to-disconnect initiatives, when properly implemented, demonstrate capacity to reduce burnout, improve work–life balance, and support productivity. However, the mere existence of formal policies proves insufficient. Cultural transformation, managerial commitment, and appropriate enforcement mechanisms represent necessary conditions for translating policy commitments into practical outcomes. These findings synthesise diverse evidence streams into a coherent framework for understanding right-to-disconnect effectiveness.
The significance of these conclusions extends to multiple stakeholder groups. Policymakers gain evidence supporting legislative intervention alongside recognition that enforcement and implementation guidance warrant attention equal to substantive provisions. Organisational leaders obtain frameworks for designing and implementing effective disconnection initiatives, with emphasis on the cultural and managerial dimensions alongside formal policy architecture. Employees and their representatives gain evidence supporting advocacy for genuine implementation rather than symbolic gestures.
Future research should address several priorities identified through this synthesis. Longitudinal studies tracking outcomes over extended periods following policy implementation would strengthen causal inference and illuminate long-term effects. Comparative analyses across jurisdictions with varying legislative approaches could identify optimal policy designs. Research examining differential effects across occupational contexts would inform tailored implementation strategies. Studies investigating the mechanisms through which cultural change occurs would enhance understanding of how to achieve genuine rather than superficial transformation. Finally, research addressing potential unintended consequences, including effects on employee autonomy and flexibility preferences, would ensure balanced evaluation of policy approaches.
The right to disconnect represents an important development in workplace regulation, responding to legitimate concerns regarding the health and social consequences of hyperconnectivity. The evidence reviewed supports cautious optimism regarding the potential for policy interventions to achieve meaningful benefits, tempered by recognition that outcomes depend critically upon implementation quality and contextual conditions. As digital connectivity continues to intensify across occupational domains, ensuring that employees retain genuine capacity for recovery and work–life balance will remain an essential objective for policy and organisational practice alike.
References
Alkandari, A., Baroun, A. and Alboloushi, B. (2025) ‘The right to disconnect: Job demands, burnout, and well-being among female teachers and regulatory policy context’, *Journal of Governance and Regulation*. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv14i2siart8
Barber, L., Santuzzi, A. and Hu, X. (2023) ‘Tackling the Problem of Workplace Telepressure: Are Disconnection Policies Helpful?’, *Group & Organization Management*, 51, pp. 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231206206
Bergen, C. and Bressler, M. (2019) ‘Work, Non-Work Boundaries and the Right to Disconnect’, *Journal of Applied Business and Economics*, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.33423/jabe.v21i1.1454
Hopkins, J. (2024) ‘Managing the Right to Disconnect—A Scoping Review’, *Sustainability*, 16(12), 4970. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16124970
Josserand, E. and Boersma, M. (2024) ‘Australia’s right to disconnect from work: Beyond rhetoric and towards implementation’, *Journal of Industrial Relations*, 66, pp. 703–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221856241290625
Lagutina, I. (2022) ‘«Right to disconnect» as one of the employee’s digital labour right’, *Juris Europensis Scientia*, 3. https://doi.org/10.32782/chern.v3.2022.5
Livori, J. (2025) ‘Right to Disconnect’, *The University of Queensland Law Journal*, 44(2). https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v44i2.13967
Mattern, J. (2020) ‘A Classification of Organizational Interventions to Enable Detachment from Work’, 35. https://doi.org/10.18690/978-961-286-362-3.8
Nirmala, T., Djamil, N. and Andaningsih, I. (2025) ‘DIGITAL DETOX POLICY AS A STRATEGIC TOOL TO REDUCE BURNOUT AND INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY IN MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES’, *Maneggio*. https://doi.org/10.62872/pa9drr31
Pansu, L. (2018) ‘Evaluation of ‘Right to Disconnect’ Legislation and Its Impact on Employee’s Productivity’, *International Journal of Management and Applied Research*, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.18646/2056.52.18-008
Thang, N. (2025) ‘A Comparative Study of the Right to Disconnect with Policy Recommendations for Vietnam’, *Hong Kong Journal of Social Sciences*, 65(11). https://doi.org/10.55463/hkjss.issn.1021-3619.65.11
Varela-Castro, W., De Los Angeles Briceño-Santacruz, M. and Castro-Solano, M. (2022) ‘The Right to Disconnect: Influence on Competitiveness, Productivity and Creativity’, *Mercados y Negocios*, 46. https://doi.org/10.32870/myn.ni46.7667.g6736
Wahab, H. and Rahman, R. (2025) ‘Disconnecting from Work: Assessing the Concept and Regulatory Implementation’, *Global Conference on Business and Social Sciences Proceeding*, 1(104). https://doi.org/10.35609/gcbssproceeding.2025.1(104)
Wahab, H., Rahman, R., Othman, S. and Mahmod, N. (2025) ‘DECENT WORK IN THE DIGITAL AGE: THE RIGHT TO DISCONNECT UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL LABOUR FRAMEWORK’, *Lex localis – Journal of Local Self-Government*. https://doi.org/10.52152/gg4r9h72
World Health Organization (2019) *Burn-out an “occupational phenomenon”: International Classification of Diseases*. Available at: https://www.who.int/news/item/28-05-2019-burn-out-an-occupational-phenomenon-international-classification-of-diseases
