A systematic literature review of interpersonal communication strategies for optimizing government employee performance in the digital era

Abstract

This research shows that ongoing digital changes have a significant impact, particularly in the government sector. In addition to ease and benefits, such as operational efficiency and faster public services, new challenges, such as problems related to system integration, human resources (HR) limitations in the use of technology, and public access to digital technology, are also present. Therefore, this study aims to explore the role of interpersonal communication in enhancing employee performance in the context of HR development in the digital era by employing the systematic literature review (SLR) method and using data from electronic databases, specifically Google Scholar using the Harsing’s Publish or Perish (Windows GUI Edition) 8.2.3944.8118, the application can be accessed by downloading (https://publish-or-perish.en.softonic.com/), and Scopus (www.scopus.com) with a focus on journals published between 2017 and 2024. By identifying research gaps, research questions were developed to understand the influence of interpersonal communication on improving employee performance in the context of public services, necessary adaptations, and interpersonal communication strategies. This research provides comprehensive insights and practical solutions for the government sector to address the dynamics of the current and future digital era, based on data analysis from reliable database sources. The risk of bias in this study was addressed through the selection criteria and data extraction method. Thematic analysis and quantitative summarization were used for data presentation and synthesis. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that interpersonal communication has a significant positive influence on employee performance. The effect size estimates for each intervention and the corresponding confidence intervals are presented. To ensure honesty and accuracy in the interpretation of the results, potential evidence limitations and biases should be acknowledged transparently.