by Cormac Spencer, Consultant and Director with Link Personnel Services
This week, Japan asked 60,000 people from hundreds of companies not to come in to work. This wasn’t a government sponsored mass lay off(!), but rather an effort to free up space on public transport ahead of the 2020 Olympics in Tokyo. The idea, of course, is that seats ordinarily occupied by commuters will be freed up for sports fans heading to the games. This scheme dubbed a “Telework Day” followed a similar trial in London in 2012 and was a success. Let’s think about that, 60,000 people didn’t head into the office and the wheels didn’t fall off the Japanese economy. While I suppose it isn’t fair to suggest that would ever happen (there are around 6m in employment in Tokyo) it raises a question as to whether we could reorient our society and economy to encourage more people to skip the commute and work from home. As well as Olympic preparation, the Japanese saw this pilot as a potential solution to the problem of overworking in Japan, and what’s more, there are many other positives to recommend the idea.
Employees who work at home save time and money associated with commuting, are under less stress, and have more time with family. Employers benefit too by having happier employees and reduced costs due to lower outlays (rent, rates etc). Wage bills can also shrink as employees accept lower salaries as a result of the cuts they are able to make to work related expenditure (commuting and childcare). Furthermore, with geography no longer an issue, companies can theoretically cast their net globally for the skills they need to succeed. Society gains too, benefiting from reduced transport emissions, less congestion, and less crowded cities with lower rents as employees no longer need to compete for city pads close to work.
A quick internet search of jobs shows that some of the biggest companies in the world are coming around to this argument. There are jobs for Sales Directors, Content Writers and Customer Support Agents available now. Call centre jobs seem like top candidates for “outsourcing to the home”. A phone, internet connection, laptop and call targets mean that employees can be just as productive as they are in the office. So, if working from home is so beneficial all round, why are such opportunities a mere drop in the ocean of available jobs?
Firstly, a lot of managers don’t think they will get the same level of commitment or results from their employees as they would if they are directly supervising them (images of employees watching daytime TV and glancing at their computers from time to time give managers cold feet) however if targets are set properly, then direct supervision shouldn’t be necessary.
Also, while some people are just as productive at home, it’s also true that some people can’t motivate themselves properly unless they are in a work environment, others find that they like to delineate work from home space. Another reason is simply that the creativity and free exchange of ideas that happens when people are in close proximity is still difficult to replicate over conferencing software.
There are whole swathes of jobs that can never be done from home – Think of your dentist filling your teeth by remote control! – and it’s true that many jobs benefit from people being in close quarters. However, the benefits of allowing people to work from home, either part-time or full-time, should not be ignored. Employee, employer and wider society can benefit, and I believe that as technology continues to improve there will be many more such opportunities available.
