[Futurework] Teleworking -- or, a fortune awaits a house-builder

[Keith Hudson]

It has amazed me in recent years why teleworking has not taken off at a far greater speed than hitherto and is not far more widespread. British Telecom reckon that there are about 1.5 million people who work from home in Enlgand via the telephone or the internet, but that as many as 5 million could easily do so. When I see the hundreds of Ministry of Defence civil servants who drive past my house every morning going to work in drab offices where they sit and talk or telephone all day, or sit and write sometimes or attend dreary committee meetings, there is little doubt in mind that many more jobs in the country could also be done from home.

Or perhaps not home. During the last six years, during which I had set up my own teleworking business, which involves a team of colleagues in seven countries (and who have never met) publishing work which is bought by customers in over 70 countries, I have often returned to the thought. Why aren't there more teleworking businesses? And why don't many more large firms encourage their staff to work from home? Both they and their workers would save immense amounts of time, commuting costs and expensive office accommodation.

One of the reasons, I thought, was the insecurity (or the status needs) of middle management who need to be able to see their workers in case they shirk their duties. We all know those photographs of Victorian foremen patrolling machine-shop floors, or matronly office supervisors pacing large offices in which hundreds of girls battered away busily at their Remingtons. We've also seen modern photographs of huge call centre offices with hundreds of individuals booths vanishing into the far distance. Now in that case, it seems to me that the profitable thing that employers should have done next is to ask their staff to work from home. Instead, many employers have now taken two jumps forward by moving the work entirely to Bangalore. This, of course, is even more profitable, and I can't blame them. Nevertheless, I feel sure that some companies who've made this move regret it because even the very bright Indian staff don't always understand callers' dialects and, often, their problems, because they are not familiar with our culture.

The other reason I thought of for the slow adoption of teleworking from home is the obvious one that perhaps people are lonely when working from home. It took quite a while for the penny to drop in my case because, personally, I like working alone, and it never occurred to me that some may find it stressful. I have friends, obviously, and I communicate (and gossip!) a great deal, but most of that that takes place over the Internet these days. But research is showing that it is indeed this lack of sociability which is the chief reason why many people don't want to work from home and why the idiotic (and unhealthy) practice of driving for long distances every day to go to work -- and back again in the evening -- is so readily accepted by so many people.

So here's something. I have had this idea for some years and have thought through most of the angles, I think. I'm quite convinced that there's a fortune awaiting those house-builder who try it out. It is to build a modern village of, say 20-100 houses -- together with a combined office unit large enough for most, or all, of the adults -- together with café facilities -- together with a lounge -- together with a crèche/nursery for pre-school children. There would be no need for all the adults to work for the same employer. Each could have his/her own private office -- but these would have ready access to the other facilities. Besides the obvious savings in rents and commuting costs, there would also be savings in the time and money spent in nursery care for children. The parents themselves could take it in turns to supervise, without any additional costs.

There we are. That's the idea. In due course, I'm quite sure that something along these lines will take place, even if it only occurs by being rammed into existence by the steeply increasing costs of travel in the years to come. So, step forward any house-builder who wishes to make a fortune!

Keith Hudson

<<<<
ATTRACTION OF AN OUT OF OFFICE EXPERIENCE

A large scale study show teleworking offers a range of benefits

Alison Maitland

Gossip is one of the greatest attractions of office life. But as teleworking gradually takes hold, it turns out that this pastime is one of the main casualties, much to the distress of those deprived of their daily fix. So a few companies that have pioneered hot-desking have introduced a café culture to try to preserve their mobile employees' sense of community.

The Dutch subsidiary of Oracle, the US technology group, invested $10 million during the late 1990s to turn buildings into what it calls "FUNctional offices". Each person's space has been cut from 23 square metres to 13. The compensation is a central café, in which to meet colleagues when using the office, and brightly coloured surroundings to provide "a buzz". Hot-desking has its detractors but the Oracle employees say the teleworking arrangements have improved their lives. The company says it has gained $20 million over five years from the reduction in space, improved productivity and higher staff retention.

Vision Web is a young, Dutch-based company with 400 consultants specialising in data warehousing, wireless networks and e-commerce. Most are mobile workers. When they need an office, they use flexible workspace at one of the company's five "meeting places", each of which has a large café as its centrepiece. The company says its work model, based on trusting individuals to organise their schedules and to be productive, requires just three square metres of office space per person, with resulting savings in energy.

These two businesses are fairly unusual in having worked out the costs and benefits, according to a study published this week by the European Commission-funded Sustainable Teleworking (SusTel) project. The findings will be discussed at workshops at BT's showcase teleworking centre in London next week and in Brussels in January.

The two-year research, covered 30 organisations with teleworking experience in Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK. Staff were surveyed in six organisations, including BT, Oracle and BAA, the British airports operator. Only 12 of the organisations had a complete understanding of the costs and benefits, 10 had a partial understanding and eight had a limited grasp.

It was difficult for some to make comparisons because everyone teleworked, says Peter James, co-ordinator of the study, Is Teleworking Sustainable? "Cultural and legal barriers are also important. In Denmark, for example, telework is often seen as a right, which does not need detailed justification or monitoring."

Claims that teleworking improves productivity can also be dubious if employees are under pressure to work harder. "Establishing with certainty that telework is the cause requires a control group of non-teleworkers, which is usually difficult to do in practice," says Prof James. However, electronic monitoring has allowed some organisations to make precise comparisons. "Nearly a quarter of the 2,100-strong staff in Telecom Italia's Info412 call centre operation work full-time from home. They spend 15 per cent less time on calls than other staff and take 3.3 per cent more calls an hour. The company has encouraged teleworking by paying "rent" for four square metres of space in employees' homes and covering extra electricity costs. It says it has benefited from savings on office space, lower absenteeism and greater flexibility.

A pilot scheme involving staff who process claims for welfare benefits electronically for Bradford council in England produced similar results. The home-based workers were 25 per cent more productive on average, measured by the number of claims processed per hour, and their accuracy levels remained similar.

Isolation is often a problem for teleworkers. LVM, a German insurance company, has tried to overcome this by pairing staff. Typically, one of the pair works from home on a Monday and from the office on a Tuesday, while the other does the opposite. The system has been so successful that 600 of the more than 2,000 staff at LVM headquarters now work in this way. Absenteeism is 14 per cent lower among teleworkers and they have proved more productive. The insurer says it has made about $50 million worth of savings in office space.

Prof James says teleworking can have negative effects, including longer working hours for some employees. Much-trumpeted reductions in car travel can be partly offset by increased use of cars for short journeys near home. However, he says the disadvantages of teleworking can be minimised by well designed and managed schemes, and that they are balanced by the many more potential benefits.

Financial Times -- 5 November 2003
>>>>


Keith Hudson, Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org>, <www.handlo.com>, <www.property-portraits.co.uk>