A Modern Way of Commuting: Telecommuting

Given the ever increasing demands for business expansion, international partnerships and cooperation, today commuting not only stands for the action of getting to and from work, but also implies the extensive travel employees have to undertake to meet with remotely located team members, colleagues, and business partners. While commuting can be very time inefficient and costly, the rapid development of mobile technology provides a solution.

The term ‘telecommuting’ refers to employees using modern technologies to work outside their office, let it be their home or any other location, either regularly or from time to time. A recent survey conducted by global market research company Ipsos shows that, as of the year 2011, one in five (17%) employees with online access are telecommuting, and another 34% would very likely take the opportunity, if provided. Hence, telecommuters are quickly becoming a norm in modern workplaces.

Interestingly, the Ipsos survey results showed that telecommuting is most widely spread in emerging markets, as employees in the Middle East and Africa, Latin America and Asia-Pacific are considerably more involved in frequent telecommuting than those in North America and Europe. More specifically, the top five countries pursuing telecommuting employment are India (56%), Indonesia (34%), Mexico (30%), Argentina (29%), and South Africa (28%), while it is least popular in Hungary (3%), Germany (5%), Sweden (6%), France (7%), and Italy (7%). To explain this pattern, we could assume that emerging markets are more in favor of telecommuting due to the rapidly changing, developing, and hence, unsettled work environments. For example, establishing a subsidiary in an emerging market might require a lot of involvement from head office, some of which could be addressed through telecommuting as an alternative to frequent business travel (see also my previous post on virtual assignments here) .

The survey also revealed some perceived benefits and hesitations in regards to this type of employment. The majority of respondents globally agreed that telecommuting helps to keep women in the workplace alongside raising children, as well as generally decreases employees’ stress levels due to avoiding times in transit between home and work. As for the drawbacks, 62% of survey respondents agreed that telecommuting produces a feeling of social isolation. About half of the respondents also found that telecommuting hinders promotions, and creates family conflicts.

While from the employee’s perspective telecommuting is primarily a question of workplace flexibility and hence work-life balance, employers are more concerned with whether telecommuting affects the productivity of employees. Addressing this question, a recent article in the Telegraph refers to a relevant experiment undertaken by Telefonica UK’s O2 division. Specifically, O2 ran an experiment where the majority of employees from a head-office worked from home on the same day. According to staff experience, both productivity and work/life balance benefited from this approach. Similar conclusions can be drawn from the Ipsos survey, which reports that two thirds (65%) of respondents find that flexibility of telework increases productivity, and 78% agree that it helps to achieve work-life balance. Hence, employees generally report a high degree of satisfaction with telecommuting.

Following up on this topic, another Telegraph article discusses mobile working solely from a business perspective. Similar to employees’ perceptions, business leaders highlight the usefulness of mobile technology, as it allows for work flexibility, decreases periods of inactivity, and generally increases business efficiency. Moreover, for business leaders telecommuting is frequently a matter of cost, as it allows savings from establishing and maintaining working places and facilities. Naturally, telecommuting also has downsides for employers. Managers should ensure that “always-on technology” does not translate into “always-on employees,” as it can eventually lead to employee burnout. At the same time, encouraging remote employees to self-manage themselves implies high levels of trust in their work ethics, and requires implementation of modern technological solutions for maintaining regular communication with them. Last but not least, the matter of data security is brought up, as keeping the business mobile enhances the threat of losing or revealing some of the company’s confidential information.

As it shows, while the benefits of telecommuting can be vast both for employees and employers, there are also several drawbacks, which should be continuously managed. The reality of a company with telecommuting employees is that managers need to learn to lead virtual teams and display the same levels of professional conduct and efficiency as managers that regularly meet their subordinates in the office with all the comfort of face-to-face communication. Next week’s article will look at the more specific managerial implications for helping companies to manage their remote employees and keep them engaged, even though they are physically dispersed.

 

5 thoughts on “A Modern Way of Commuting: Telecommuting

  1. I think it’s really hard to manage an employee who telecommutes if there are a lot of distractions in his environment. I might be wrong but based on research, employees who are working from home are privileged to do whatever they want, so they can browse non-related sites or even play online games if they like. I bumped a forum site that talks about a few software that could help to manage a telecommuting employee. Hope this helps.

  2. Very true Jonas. I have the same feeling that it is hard to manage telecommuter. I once used Rescuetime for perosnal management and currently use icedeep worktracker to monitor my teams work. Just for your reference.

  3. I telecommute from my base in Europe to our HQ in Silicon Valley. This arrangement works perfectly for the most part. The company equips me with everything I need to do my job wherever I am in the world. Cost-effective modern technologies make it possible to do this. For instance we have our own internal social, conferencing, and messaging tools to communicate and collaborate. And English is the company language for everything, except where legal documents require and then a translation is provided.

    I appreciate being able to enjoy the better lifestyle offered by Europe (e.g. more holidays and social benefits) than in the US while being able to work for a leading US firm. Having commuted for most of my career, being able to avoid wasting 2-3 hours per day traveling is a real bonus for myself and the firm. This time can be used for more productive purposes or lifestyle pursuits while still making your minimum hours. Though it must be said it is common place to exceed the minimum European working hours in a professional position.

    The timezone difference is a love/hate relationship. Mornings are quiet and it is easier to focus then, afternoons are busy communicating with my US counterparts, and evenings are often used for having conference calls during the US mid-morning or early afternoon. This latter part can be quite disruptive for my family and social life but it is the price I must pay. The trick is to juggle work, family, social, and leisure activities and reschedule calls when necessary to fit. This arrangement is referred to as “scatter time”.

    The distance is also a drawback at times, face-to-face contact is important for establishing a working relationship in the first instance, though it is not absolutely essential. With the large number of people I have to interface with in a large company, this is not always possible, telecommuting or not. It helps to have had face-to-face contact with those you work on a regular basis with to establish a personal connection. And I can visit our local subsidiary when I want to socialize with fellow employees and they appreciate learning about what is happening over in HQ.

    In terms of my ability to produce, I think the concerns expressed here are misplaced. In my experience workers that are on to a good deal do not abuse it. That it especially the case for telecommuters, expats and immigrants who often work harder than the host country nationals. There is a strong incentive for them to secure their privileged working arrangements. HR runs a comprehensive performance management system for personnel to ensure all workers meet expectations and to weed out those that cannot produce. It is meritocratic and we are measured on our results rather than our office politics or how we are seen to perform. Micromanagement tracking tools are not necessary with such a system in place. Those that cannot handle telecommuting or whose role is not suitable do not receive this privilege or may instead have a blended onsite/telecommute arrangement.

    So telecommuting works great when it is done the right way for the right people.

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1 + 7 =