What is the gift exchange concept?

I have written about social exchange theory before (Thibault & Kelly, 1959; read more here), and it appears that the 'gift exchange' concept is the same as SET. Who knew! So gift exchange - and therefore SET, too - is similar to our psychological contract where we weigh up the discretionary benefits we obtain through our work and off-set those gains against remuneration and how we are treated (Rousseau, 1989). 

In the workplace, SET and gift exchange becomes more important when we are working from home (WFH) because, rather than an employer contractual obligation, staff see it as an employer 'gift'; a type of social reciprocity, where staff may feel an obligation to repay the organisation for their generosity (Akkermans et al., 2025; Chung, 2022). We feel gratitude... and most of the time that psychological contract exchange will be fair. By allowing staff to WFH, organisations are effectively showing trust and care. As a result, staff tend to feel more loyal and committed to their employer (Chung, 2022; Wheatley, 2022). Most of those who WFH feel gratitude, and don't feel exploited by the reciprocity dividend in returning an increased workload dividend to the employer for the WHF privilege. 

If we roll back our thinking back to Herzberg's Motivation Hygiene theory (1966; read more here) to remind ourselves that motivators tend to be non-monetary aspects of our work: recognition, trust, responsibility, and growth opportunities, we can consider that WFH could be treated as a motivation factor along with training, and having flexibility and autonomy in self-management of our work schedule. These motivators are far more likely to increase staff performance than are demotivators such as bonuses (Chung, 2022; Herzberg, 1966). And a happy worker is likely to stay with the form longer.

Some of us may feel the need to return far more value for the trust that has been put in us, and to intensify our work: which may lead to a psychological sense of duty for "the worker needing to work when they are not scheduled to work or working harder during the hours they are working" (Chung, 2022, p. 70; Akkermans et al., 2025). This type of intensification may result in longer working hours, missing breaks, or a sense of being "always on" (Chung, 2022; Wheatley, 2022). An unbalanced power dynamic within the employment relationship could slip into exploitation (Chung, 2022; Wheatley, 2022). 

This is now known as "The Flexibility Paradox": where more freedom at work may lead to us doing more work (Chung, 2022). As most WFH contracts are implicitly arranged, the blurred boundaries can mean that staff feel a continual pressure to perform to show their value and that the trust shown in them by the employer is warranted (Akkermans et al., 2025). 

Having explicit WFH arrangements with clear boundaries will help to ensure that the gift exchange stays on the balance side of the leger, where all parties can be confident in the equity and parity of the psychological and employment contracts. This too should lead to a productivity bonus for the organisation, and longer-serving employees (Chung, 2022). Implicit WFH arrangements with blurred boundaries increases the risk of mental spillover and employee burnout, as the lines between professional gratitude and personal time become blurred (Akkermans et al., 2025; Chung 2022).

Let's be explicit out there.

Sam

References:

Akkermans, J., Keegan, A., & Pichault, F. (Eds.). (2025). Research Handbook of Careers in the Gig Economy. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Chung, H. (2022). The flexibility paradox: Why flexible working leads to (self-)exploitation. Policy Press.

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the Nature of Man. World Publishing Company.

Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2(2), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384942

Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. Routledge.

Wheatley, D. (2022). Chapter 24: Work Time, Place and Space in the ‘New Normal’. In Holland, P., Bartram, T., Garavan, T., & Grant, K. (Eds.), The Emerald Handbook of Work, Workplaces and Disruptive Issues in HRM (pp. 457-476). Emerald Group Publishing.

* NotebookLM was used to create the image accompanying this post