In 2009 Forrester Research predicted that more than half the workforce would be teleworking by 2016:

"Fueled by broadband adoption, better collaboration tools, and growing management experience, the U.S. telecommuting ranks will swell to 63 million by 2016. Those 29 million new telecommuters lined up five abreast would stretch from New York to LA! Leading the surge are occasional telecommuters and regular telecommuters who work from home between one and four days a week."

Lots of other respected organizations have made similar projections.

Well, call me a skeptic, but while I'd love nothing better than to see an end to traffic jams, I just don't see it happening any time soon.

For those of us who are lucky enough to work where and when we want, it's easy to forget that the majority of the workforce doesn't. They're bound to the cubicle farm with tethers that date back to the days of sweatshops and typing pools. Those tethers, a.k.a. managers, simply can't imagine not being able to see the backs of their employee's heads from 9 to 5 each day.

My organization, the Telework Research Network, just completed a study that looked at telework trends over the past five years. Sponsored by Citrix Online, our summary report, The State of Telework in the U.S., reveals who's really teleworking, what they're doing, and where they're doing it. We even dared to make a prediction of our own--but it's one that's sure to disappoint the true believers, advocates, and companies hoping to cash in on the trend.

First for the good news. Telework is growing. In fact, based on U.S. Census data 61% more employees considered home their primary place of work in 2009 than in 2005, despite the recession. While the full story on the impact of the recession won't be known until 2010 Census data is available, private sector survey data just released by WorldatWork, suggests that while the overall number of teleworkers declined between 2008 and 2010, the frequency of telework increased.

Now the bad news. Census data shows that only 2.9 million employees work from home more than half the time (not including the self-employed). That's only 2.3% of the workforce. So while 61% growth sounds impressive, it has more to do with how low the number was five years ago than any kind of a wholesale change in the way we work.

How can it be that while 80% of Fortune Magazine's "100 Best Companies To Work For" already offer telecommuting, so few people are doing it on a regular basis? Again, I say, if you're lucky enough to workshift regularly, count your blessings. While a majority of large companies say they offer telework, it's largely granted as an occasional accommodation for only a handful of employees. Our study in fact showed that over 75% of employees who work from home earn over $65,000 per year, putting them in the upper 80 percentile of the workforce.

Employees want to telework-- according to WorldatWork, almost 80% of would do so at least part of the time if allowed. The tools and technologies to support it are widely available, inexpensive, and easy to use. But most companies simply don't have the culture of trust that comes from measuring performance by what people do rather than when, where, or how they do it.

In his bestselling book, Drive, Dan Pink observes "...despite four decades of scientific research on human motivation, there's an immense mismatch between what science knows and what management does."

He goes on to say, "...while the carrots and sticks worked successfully in the 20th century, it's precisely the wrong way to motivate people today."

It's time for managers to wake up from their "management by walking around" stupor. Fact is, their employees have already left the building. According to a recent DEGW survey of 60,000 worldwide employees, knowledge workers are not at their desk 65% of the time. So how's that whole management by walking around thing working? Not so good, I'd guess. If fact, as Pink and the majority of management gurus have been telling us for years, it really never did.

What employees of all age groups want is the flexibility to determine for themselves where, when, and how they work.

They want to be trusted.

They want to do their best and feel that they're a part of greater whole.

They want to be treated like adults.

And if they can't get what they want, they'll go somewhere else or venture out on their own.

This is not your grandfather's workforce.

You can download a copy of The State of Telework in the U.S. report here.

Photo Credit: TylerIngram

China Business News (CBN) reports that telecommuting offers the greatest potential for carbon emission reductions in China.

Guo Yonghong, chairman of China Mobile Hubei, told an audience of environmental experts, local government officials and company representatives that telecommuting could save 340 million tons of CO2 emissions in 2020. Virtual meetings could save 623 million tons of CO2 annually. By 2030, that could cut commercial aviation emissions by nearly 40 percent. 

It's easy to ignore just how big an impact small changes in how we live can make. 

A joint World Wildlife Fund (WWF) China and China Mobile study published earlier this year shows that China's telecommunications sector cut 48.5 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions in 2008 and 58.2 million tons in 2009. Those savings nearly match the total 2008 emissions of some countries including Sweden, Denmark or Finland. Lei Hongpeng, senior program officer of WWF China explained that those savings came from strategies such as telecommuting, electronic data interfaces and more efficient logistics.

The study looked at direct savings from 14 of China Mobile's low-carbon information communication technologies (ICTs). These include smart logistics (matching truck deliveries to loads), dematerialization (saving paper and other materials), smart work (smart meetings, and reducing commuting and travel needs) and smart appliances (remotely monitored and controlled for energy savings).

The potential reduction from dematerialization, smart logistics, and smart work amounts to 399 million tons in 2010, 615 million tons in 2020, and 1,298 million tons in 2030.

"The potential savings from smart logistics, smart meetings and smart commuting contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emission reductions and to China's target of reducing the carbon intensity of its economy by 40 to 45 percent by the year 2020," said Peng Jinxin, former director-general of the Ministry of Environmental Protection's department of policy, laws and regulations.

According to the World Wildlife Fund, if the European Union's 25 (EU-25) participating countries reached 10% telework participation, they would collectively reduce CO2 emissions by 22 million tons. If 50% of employees within the EU25 replaced one in-person meeting with an audio conference, it would save 2 million tons of CO2. And if the EU-25 replaced 20% of travel with a video-conference, the savings would total 22 million tons of CO2. According to EPA.gov, all together, these three simple solutions would save the equivalent of:

• Annual greenhouse gas emissions from 8 million passenger vehicles
• CO2 emissions from 4.6 billion gallons of gasoline consumed
• CO2 emissions from 97 million barrels of oil consumed
• CO2 emissions from 557 thousand tanker trucks' worth of gasoline
• CO2 emissions from the electricity use of 5 million homes for one year
• CO2 emissions from the energy use of 3.6 million homes for one year
• Carbon sequestered by 1.1 billion tree seedlings grown for 10 years
• Carbon sequestered annually by 8.9 acres of pine or fir forests
• Carbon sequestered annually by 396 thousand acres of forest preserved from deforestation
• CO2 emissions from 1.7 billion propane cylinders used for home barbeques
• CO2 emissions from burning 218 thousand railcars' worth of coal
• Greenhouse gas emissions avoided by recycling 14 million tons of waste instead of sending it to the landfill
• Annual CO2 emissions of 10.8 coal fired power plants

Photo Credit: Pierre Marcel

Recent research shows than 70% of the workforce is not engaged. They're either wandering around in a fog or actively undermining their co-workers' success. They're burned out, disenfranchised, and over 80% are ready to jump ship.

Eyeing the end of the recession, employees are no longer happy just to have a job. Boomers who haven't already made their exit are anticipating it. Gen X-ers watched their workaholic parents collapse under the strain, and aren't about to make the same mistakes. Gen Y-ers grew up independent, tech savvy, and were taught to question authority. Now they're questioning their employers.

This is not your father's workforce.

What employees of all age groups want is the flexibility to determine for themselves where, when, and how they work.

But how do you know they're working if you can't see them? That question, and the fact that it's asked so often, points to a real problem with management today. Whether your employees are down the hall or thousands of miles away, if you're not measuring by results, you really don't know who's working and who isn't.

In his bestselling book, Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, Daniel Pink observes that despite four decades of scientific research on human motivation, there's an immense mismatch between what science knows and what management does. "While carrots and sticks worked successfully in the 20th century, it's precisely the wrong way to motivate people today," writes Pink.

When managers buy into the concept that results are what matter, and integrate it with a flexible work environment, it opens the door to a cascade of benefits. It's been shown to:

• Save companies between $10,000 to $20,000 per employee a year by lowering real estate, turnover, and absenteeism costs and increasing employee productivity
• Reduce company/employee carbon footprint and fuel usage
• Attract the best and the brightest, regardless of where they live
• Engage workers who would otherwise not be available (e.g. caregivers, part-timers, the disabled, military spouses, retirees)
• Improve continuity of operations
• Increase staffing efficiencies
• Save employees thousands of dollars a year in commuting costs
  

Demographic, cultural, economic, and technological realities have forever changed the nature of work. Thought leaders agree, companies that don't understand that results are what matter will be left in the dust behind those that have.

Results-based management is no longer just an HR tactic. When deployed as the foundation for letting people work where, when, and how they work best, it's a winning business strategy for today's global, mobile market.

For more on why and how to make results-based management work for your organization, download this Citrix GoToMeeting-sponsored whitepaper: Results-Based Management--The Key to Unlocking Talent and Increasing Productivity.

Okay, maybe I'm a cheap date about anything that promotes remote work, but this video by WorkshiftCalgary brought tears to my eyes.

If you can't view the below video, go watch it over here.

Robyn Bews, the project manager for WorkshiftCalgary, and her team have put together a truly impressive program to help Calgary businesses "think outside the office." With funding from Transport Canada and the Government of Alberta, WorkshiftCalgary offers the tools, best practices, and resources that make it easy for companies to participate in their pilot.

"We're already working with over a dozen companies ranging in size from a couple of hundred employees to several thousand," says Bews. "It requires a real culture change to overcome the how-do-I-manage-them-if-I-can't-see-them mentality, but we're making headway."

In the U.S., only a handful of states have programs that aggressively encourage workshifting in the private sector. My own state, California--where traffic and smog continually plague its top cities--had one of the first telework initiatives in the country. Note the word "had," as we no longer do. What's with that? Meanwhile, thirty-seven states, are actively discouraging it with predatory tax and labor rules.

Let's take a lesson from our friends to the north, eh? It's time to make the road less traveled the way to work.

Help promote the good work that WorkshiftCalgary is doing by sending the video to all your workshifting blogger friends.

It's time for state lawmakers to wake up to the fact that we live in a mobile world--one where work is a verb, not a place. Sadly, short of federal intervention, most states aren't likely to change their ways anytime soon. According to the Survey of State Tax Departments, thirty-five states currently have laws that could lead to double taxation if an employee doesn't work in the same state as his or her employer.

What lawmakers don't seem to understand is that laws that discourage mobility, discourage people from living there, businesses from locating there, and out-of-state businesses from hiring there.

Several large all-virtual employers already choose not to hire in states--such as California, West Virginia, and Rhode Island--where the regulatory environment makes it difficult to operate.

Where does the stupidity stop? If a plumber from Bucks County (PA) drives across the river to fix a leaky sink in Lambertville (NJ), does he have to file a New Jersey tax return? How about the Maryland accountant who spends a week on-site during a NJ company audit? What about an employee of a NY company who works from their NJ home on the weekend?

Workshifting strategies allow companies to hire the best and the brightest. They offer the disabled and those living in rural areas a way to increase their standard of living. They allow stay-at-home parents and caregivers continue to earn a living. They support the mobility needs of military families. And they provide the 80% of retiring Baby Boomers who want to continue working, a way to do so flexibly.

But double taxation isn't the only burden for companies that operate in mobility-challenged states. Once you're an 'employer' in a foreign state, you'll need to make sure that one-day-a-month teleworker is in compliance with that state's labor laws, workers compensation rules, ERISA regulations, and a rat's nest of complex, expensive, and impossible-to-track / impossible-to-comply-with regulations.

The easy decision, of course, will be not to go there--literally and figuratively.

Now if I was in charge of economic development in one of those few states that 'gets it,' I'd be actively seducing companies with my 21st century tax laws. And I'd be luring the best and the brightest employees who choose not to be tethered to a cubicle for the rest of their life.

For those state legislators who continue to bury their collective heads in the sand, the wake up call may just come after taxpayers have left the commonwealth.

Additional Reading on Telecommuting and Taxes:

Why You Need to Know About the Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act

Telecommuting: Don't Allow State Tax Issues to Disrupt the Connection

Photo Credit: shovelmonkey1

The Telework Improvements Act (H.R. 1722) got a second chance in the House on July 14th and won. The same bill was narrowly defeated in May. A similar bill (S.707) passed unanimously in the Senate on May 24th.

While it's been a mandate since the year 2000 that every federal worker telecommute to the maximum extent possible, participation rates are only slightly higher than those of the private sector. According to a recent report, only about 100,000 of the government's 2 million workers telework at least one day a month--a number that's actually declined in recent years. While still higher than private sector participation, only about 5 percent of the total federal workforce telework and less than 9% of those who are eligible do so.
 
If signed into law by the President, the Telework Improvements Act would, among other things, direct the Office of Personnel Management to issue regulations on telework, require agencies to come up with policies that permit teleworking for up to 20 percent of the hours worked over two weeks, require agencies to designate a telework managing officer, provide training to employees, and ensure that there are no distinctions between teleworkers and others in performance appraisals. Independent of this bill, the Obama administration has set a goal of having 150,000 teleworkers by 2011, and 500,000 by 2014.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates program costs at $30 million over a five year period. In fact, the staggering costs of lost productivity from federal workers during last Winter's snowstorms--estimated by the government at $71 million a day--would pay for the five year cost of H.R. 1722 in one snow day.

The potential savings of the program were not presented by CBO. Using assumptions from a 2006 study commissioned by the U.S. General Services Administration (conducted by Booz Allen), we used our Telework Savings Calculator to quantify the potential governments savings if those eligible federal employees who wanted to work from home did so just one day every other week (half the level required in H.R. 1722):

Agencies would:
- Increase productivity by over $2.3 billion each year - equivalent to 26,000 man years of work
- Save $850 million in annual real estate, electricity, and related costs
- Save $2.3 billion in annual absenteeism
- Save $3.1 billion in annual employee turnover
- Improve continuity of operations
- Improve work life balance and better address the needs of families, parents, and senior caregivers.
- Avoid the 'brain drain' effect of retiring boomers by allowing them to work flexibly
- Be able to recruit and retain the best people
- Offer fuller employment for disabled workers, rural residents, and military families

Federal Employees would:
- Achieve a better work-life balance
- Save $400-$1,400/year in transportation and work-related expenses
- Collectively save $57 million a year at the pumps
- Suffer fewer illnesses

The Nation would:
- Save almost 3 million barrels and $233 million in imported oil
- Reduce greenhouse gases by 532,000 tons/year--the equivlient of taking 97,000 cars off the road
- Reduce road travel by 1.2 billion miles/year saving $20 million in road maintenance
- Reduce road congestion thereby increasing productivity for non-teleworkers as well
- Save 1,000 people from traffic-related injury or death each year and save $117 million a year in related costs
- Improve emergency responsiveness
- Reduce pollution from road work and new office construction
- Preserve open spaces
- Alleviate the strain on our crumbling transportation infrastructure
- Reduce terrorism targets of opportunity

Talk of a national telework initiative has been rattling around Washington ever since the start of the current administration. While the Telework Improvements Act does nothing for the private sector--except perhaps reducing traffic in areas with significant government workers and possibly shortening the wait time at downtown D.C. Starbucks'--hopefully it will send a strong message of endorsement of the concept to the private sector.

What do you think?

Photo Credit: Vinoth Chandar
 

Consensus Would Save Taxpayers $11 Billion a Year

Just two weeks after a narrow defeat in the House, the Senate unanimously passed legislation (S.707) that would beef up federal workshifting participation. Passage of H.R. 1722--The Telework Improvements Act, a nearly identical bill, missed by only 4% with all but one of the nay votes coming from the Republican side of the house. It's hard not to blame party politics for the House failure since they themselves passed an almost mirror bill in the last months of the Bush administration.

Many of the House naysayers cited costs, which the Congressional Budget Office estimated to be $30 million over a five year period, as the reason for their opposition to the bill. Our reseach shows the bill would actually save agency and employee participants $11 billion a year. Let's see, that's something like a 1,800x return on investment.

The House bill should have made it a no-brainer. You'd think the staggering costs of lost productivity from federal workers during this Winter's snowstorms--estimated by the government's own bean counters at $71 million a day--would wake lawmakers up to the need for a trained teleworkforce. Apparently, at least in the House, those memories melted along with the ice.

Only 5.2% of the 4.7 million government workforce telecommutes on a regular basis but 61% are considered eligible. Based on assumptions from a 2006 study commissioned by the U.S. General Services Administration (conducted by Booz Allen) our Telework Savings Calculator shows that if those eligible employees who wanted to work from home did so just one day every other week (the level required in H.R. 1722):


Agencies would:

• Increase productivity by over $2.3 billion each year - equivalent to 26,000 man years of work
• Save $850 million in annual real estate, electricity, and related costs
• Save $2.3 billion in annual absenteeism
• Save $3.1 billion in annual employee turnover
• Improve continuity of operations
• Improve work life balance and better address the needs of families, parents, and senior caregivers.
• Avoid the 'brain drain' effect of retiring boomers by allowing them to work flexibly
• Be able to recruit and retain the best people
• Offer fuller employment for disabled workers, rural residents, and military families

Federal Employees would:

• Achieve a better work-life balance
• Save $400-$1,400/year in transportation and work-related expenses
• Collectively save $57 million a year at the pumps
• Suffer fewer illnesses

The Nation would:

• Save almost 3 million barrels and $233 million in imported oil
• Reduce greenhouse gases by 532,000 tons/year--the equivlient of taking 97,000 cars off the road
• Reduce road travel by 1.2 billion miles/year saving $20 million in road maintenance
• Reduce road congestion thereby increasing productivity for non-teleworkers as well
• Save 1,000 people from traffic-related injury or death each year and save $117 million a year in related costs
• Improve emergency responsiveness
• Reduce pollution from road work and new office construction
• Preserve open spaces
• Alleviate the strain on our crumbling transportation infrastructure
• Reduce terrorism targets of opportunity
• That's a savings of over $5,000 per telecommuter.

Supporters of the H.R. 1722 need your help bringing the bill back to the floor under a full session. The President, the First Lady, and the director of the Office of Personnel Management, John Berry, have all professed their support for workshifting. If you agree, please contact your political representatives and urge them to vote to make the road less traveled the way to work. A list of those who opposed the vote is available and you can cast your own vote on the bill at OpenCongress.

Want to know what your company could save by workshifting? Download our latest white paper: Workshifting:The Bottom Line


Photo Credit: myoldpostcards

Our just released eBook "Workshifting: Bottom Line Benefits" (sponsored by Citrix Online) quantifies the business, individual, and societal impact that regular telecommuting could have on the nation and for small to mid-size companies.

Less than 2% of U.S. employees work from home the majority of the time (not including the self-employed), but 40% hold jobs that are compatible with telework. If those employees who wanted to (about 80%) did so just half of the time (roughly the national average for those who do) (*):


Businesses would:

• Increase productivity by over $235 billion
• Save $124 billion in real estate, electricity, and related costs
• Save $46 billion in absenteeism
• Save $31 billion in employee turnover
• Improve continuity of operations
• Avoid environmental sanctions, city access fees, etc.
• Improve work life balance and better address the needs of families, parents, and senior caregivers.
• Avoid the 'brain drain' effect of retiring boomers by allowing them to work flexibly
• Be able to recruit and retain the best people
• Better address the needs of disabled workers, rural residents, and military families
  

Individuals would:

• Achieve a better work-life balance
• Recoup 2-3 weeks of free time per year--time they'd have otherwise spent commuting
• Save $2,000-$7,000/year
• Save $15 billion at the pumps
• Suffer fewer illnesses
  

The Nation would:

• Save 289 million barrels of oil--equivalent to 37% of our Persian Gulf imports
• Reduce greenhouse gases by 53 million tons/year--27% of the President's 2020 goal
• Reduce road travel by 115 billion miles/year saving $2 billion in road maintenance
• Reduce road congestion thereby increasing productivity for non-workshifters as well
• Save 100,000 people from traffic-related injury or death
• Improve emergency responsiveness
• Reduce pollution from road work and new office construction
• Preserve open spaces
• Reduce the number of latchkey kids
• Alleviate the strain on our crumbling transportation infrastructure
• Reduce the offshoring of jobs and homeshore some that have already been lost
• Raise the standard of living in rural and disadvantaged areas
• Open new avenues for workforce retraining 
• Reduce terrorism targets of opportunity
  

In total, that's an economic impact of almost $650 billion a year!

At the TeleworkResearchNetwork we've synthesized over 250 case studies, scholarly reviews, research papers, books, and other documents on workshifting and related topics. And we've interviewed the nation's largest and smallest virtual employers and their employees, corporate executives, telework advocates and naysayers, top researchers, legislators, legal representatives, leaders of successful telework advocacy programs in both the public and private sector, and venture capitalists who have invested in the remote work model.

Using the latest Census data, and assumptions from dozens of government and private sector sources, we've developed a model to quantify the economic, environmental, and societal potential on telecommuting for every, city, county, Congressional District, and state in the nation.  It's been used by company and community leaders throughout the U.S. and Canada to quantify the extent to which workshifting can reduce greenhouse gases and petroleum usage, save money, improve work-life balance, increase employee loyalty and turnover, reduce absenteeism, increase productivity, and reduce highway congestion and traffic accidents. You can find it over here along with a model that allows companies and communities to quantify their own potential telecommuting savings based on dozens customizable parameters such as real estate costs, turnover, absenteeism, participation rate, frequency, labor costs, etc.

More about telecommuting, the pros and cons, who's doing it, and other resources for companies, individuals and researchers are available at TeleworkResearchNetwork.com.

"It's time to make the road less traveled the way to work."

Want to get your hands on a copy? You can download it over here.


Photo Credit: Tyler Ingram

If every person in the U.S. with a workshifting-compatible job worked at home on Earth Day, collectively it would:

• Save 900 Million vehicle miles
• Save 45 Million gallons of gas--$188 Million in consumer savings
• Save 2.3 Million barrels of oil--valued at $185 Million
• Eliminate 423,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases--the equivilant of taking 77,000 cars off the road for a year.
• Save 28 million kWh in net electricity--enough to power 2,600 homes for a year
• Save 775 people from traffic injury and deaths

Less than 2% of U.S. employees work from home the majority of the time (not including the self-employed), but 40% could. If they did so just half of the time (roughly the national average for those who do), as a nation we would save over a half a trillion dollars a year and much more.

• Workshifting offers a relatively simple, inexpensive solution to some of the world's most vexing problems:
• Environmentalists applaud telecommuting because it significantly reduces greenhouse gases and energy usage.
• Astute company owners support telecommuting because of the cost savings and increased productivity.
• Work-life experts endorse telecommuting because it addresses the needs of families, parents, and senior caregivers.
• Workforce planners see telecommuting as away to avoid the 'brain drain' effect of retiring boomers.
• Human resource professionals see telecommuting as a way to recruit and retain the best people.
• Employees see telecommuting as a way to save time and money, and improve the quality of their lives.
• Baby Boomers find telecommuting offers a flexible alternative to full retirement.
• Gen Y'ers see telecommuting as a way to work on their own terms.
• Disabled workers, rural residents, and military families find home-based work an answer to their special needs.
• Urban planners realize telecommuting can reduce traffic and revitalize cities.
• Governments see telecommuting as a way to reduce highway wear and tear and alleviate the strain on our crumbling transportation infrastructure.
• Organizations rely on telecommuting to ensure continuity of operations in the event of a disaster or pandemic-all federal workers are required to telecommute to the maximum extent possible for just this reason.

More details about workshifting are available at the TeleworkResearchNetwork.com.

"It's time we made the road less traveled the way to work." What are your thoughts?


Photo Credit: FlyingSinger