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

If you've ever wondered how many people are really doing some form of virtual and/or online employment, well wonder no more. oDesk, a global employment platform, is sharing the data. You can check out the May 2011 report here.

The report offers a tremendous amount of data, including month-over-month and year-over-year reporting. It also provides insight into the kinds of jobs that are being used in a telework capacity. In May, over 90,000 jobs were created and $16M spent in online work.

The report goes on to share the top locations for online workers both in the U.S. as well as globally.

The mere fact that online employment is being tracked is significant. It ought to be an indicator that telework is gaining a hold in the modern workplace. Otherwise, there would be no need to spend time and resources reporting the results.

It also opens the door to a new dynamic. In the past, we've spent our time convincing employers to create flexible work policies in order to retain talent. And this is still important. Now that data is being reported on where to find online talent and their skill sets, employers can start actively searching for online talent to fill their next opening.

Individuals looking to brand themselves as online talent will want to dedicate some time to thinking about their personal brand. The employment market just became incredibly large and very competitive.

What do you think? Are companies paying more attention to flexible work and hiring online talent? Leave us your thoughts in the comments.

A recent survey of business leaders indicates that, over the next five years, there will be significant increases in flexible work arrangements. The primary drivers for workshifting will be the need to attract and retain rockstar talent.

The survey, titled "Flexible Work: Perceptions and Realities" was sponsored by FlexPaths, a global leader in flexible working solutions, and LinkedIn, the world's largest professional network. Survey participants included CEOs, human resources leaders and workspace decision makers.

The summary report, which you can download here, explored many of the key concepts we are still struggling with when it comes to telework: how to define it, managing employees, and understanding the measurable benefits.

What was refreshing to read is the acknowledgement that telework has become important to the competitive business landscape. For many years, telework has been known as a nice-to-have perk. Now it is being seen as a must have in the workplace for several reasons:

• The ability to attract and retain talent
• Reduction in office space and carbon footprint
• Reducing payroll without eliminating jobs

The report identifies several challenges to implementing a flexible work environment. The most common being the challenges of managing a virtual workforce. This will involve the development of new management skills, training of these new skills and major changes in business philosophy. Telework is not about "doing time at work" - it's about getting results. And holding people accountable for delivering those results.

In addition, employees will have to be equipped for the change of working outside of the traditional office environment. It's not just getting computer equipment. Let me tell you that working from home is very different than working in a cubicle. And trying to get work done at the airport or your local coffee shop can be even more of a challenge.

It's very encouraging to see more reports like this one and the real dialogue about workshifting begin. According to this report, 4 out of 5 people will be in some kind of flexible work arrangement by 2016. The conversation can't start a moment too soon. As our economy is talking about job creation, it only makes sense to include some discussion about the need to create flexible jobs and effectively building a support system for those flexible jobs.

What do you think? Will businesses increase opportunities for flexible work? Are we seeing the "tipping point" for workshifting?

Photo Credit: imsickofmaps

Last month we published an infographic on the international language of business based on a study that Citrix Online commissioned from Forrester Consulting. Today we're happy to launch the results of that study. The study yielded surprising findings related to generational and cultural working behaviors that impact how businesses communicate and collaborate in an increasingly dispersed workplace, and the implications for the future competitiveness of SMBs.

Key Findings

The study asked information workers of all ages in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany and Australia about their business communication habits.

Gen Y does not have the monopoly on technology use and social tools during the work day. Meanwhile, the older generation is getting with the program.

• Gen Y is least likely to share information via text message (26%, compared to 47% of those aged 55+), and least likely to use video conferencing, video chat and web conferencing tools.
  
  
• Gen Y uses social networking the least frequently (40% of Gen Y workers who use social media do so daily, compared to 50% of those aged 55+).
  
  
• Older Boomers (55+) have increased their business use of social media 79% in the past year.  

The younger you are, the less you value meetings - and pay attention.

• Gen Y is least likely to think meetings are efficient. Only 29% of Gen Y workers think meetings used to decide on a course of action are very efficient, compared to 45% of Older Boomers.
  
  
• Gen Y is least likely to pay attention in meetings and barely half (51%) believe it's very important to do so in meetings to decide a course of action.

Americans have more meetings - and pay more attention.

• 90% meet in person to communicate and build relationships, more than any other nationality.
  
  
• Of those, 51% meet daily, compared to a mere 31% of French.
  
  
• 75% of Americans believe it's very important to pay attention in meetings to decide on a course of action, compared to 50% of the French.

The in-person meeting is alive and well, but not necessarily effective.

• 84% of all respondents have in-person meetings, but meetings often don't achieve their goals.
  
  
• Only 45% are very satisfied that planning meetings achieve the task in hand, and only 30% believe such meetings to be very efficient.
  
  
• Across all categories of meetings for designated tasks (e.g. review of documents, plan projects or initiatives, decision on a course of action), less than half of respondents believe those meetings are very efficient.

In an era of multitasking, it's still considered rude in a meeting.

• 83% believe that side conversations are unacceptable during a meeting, and 77% frown on those doing other work on a computer or smartphone.

We still like to look each other in the eye.

• Germans like to see others during meetings (75%), while Americans find it less important (55%) though they have the most in-person meetings.
  
  
• 79% of those aged 55 and over think it's important, compared to 65% of Gen Y.
  
  
• Why? To read body language, say 78%.

Usage among users of collaborative technologies is rising fast.

• 64% of those who use social networking tools in business use them more than last year. Video chat, team document-sharing sites and web conferencing also experienced significant increases in usage, with 56%, 55% and 52% respectively.

If you would like to download a copy of the report, you can find it posted in our Downloads section here.

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

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

Business Week did a fascinating story about the effect of the real estate market on unemployment and economic recovery.

Twenty-three percent of all mortgagees owe more than their house is worth. In Nevada, a whopping 65% of property owners are upside-down with their mortgage. According to the article, that together with a depressed housing market, the aging population, and other factors, has led to record low mobility.

So what does that have to do with unemployment? It turns out, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, that mobility is fundamental to economic recovery. If people aren't willing or able to relocate in order to find work, high rates of unemployment will continue.

That's where workshifting comes in! Bringing the work to the worker, rather than the other way around would allow people to find gainful employment without taking a bath on the sale of their home. It would also save companies a bundle in relocation packages.

Has workshifting allowed you to avoid a costly move? How else might it help speed up our economic recovery?

Photo Credit: The Shifted Librarian 

Today we have a guest post from Sean Ryan.  Sean is a research analyst with IDC focused on mobile enterprise software.

Mobility as a Service (MaaS), may be another buzzword for the road, but there is a very real shift underway towards adoption of SaaS-based solutions for mobile devices. This includes SaaS-based solutions with mobile client add-ons, such as the case with Salesforce.com for the BlackBerry and the iPhone. It also includes SaaS-based mobile middleware platforms that extend multiple enterprise applications to mobile devices, as is the case with vendors like Antenna Software and Spring Wireless.

Many factors are contributing to the MaaS trend, but here are a few of the biggest drivers:

• The flexibility of enterprises to easily scale up and scale down users based on an on-demand subscription pricing model.
  
  
• The ability for enterprises to start small, in terms of number of users deployed and cash outlay, with certain apps and then grow them across the organization. This equates to being able to run a pilot on your own terms without time constraints or an obligation to purchase a set number of seats at a given time.
  
  
• A lightweight client can often be provisioned down to devices over-the-air (OTA).
  
  
• The challenges unique to mobile deployments -- e.g., limitations of wireless connectivity, limitations of small form factors, and the variety of smartphone Oses -- are a real headache for already overburdened IT departments to deal with, as they require different skill sets as well as different management and security tools. It is much easier to farm this out to a vendor that specializes in mobility.
  
  
• It is becoming very difficult for developers to keep up with the array of mobile OSes that are viable candidates for mobile workers -- i.e., BlackBerry OS, Windows Mobile, Symbian (Nokia 60, etc.), iPhone OS, Google Android, and Palm webOS. Combine this with the multiple versions for each OS along with different hardware reference designs, and the complexity is overwhelming unless the company takes a draconian approach to drastically limit the types of devices it will allow employees to use. Again, a vendor specializing in mobility can do a much better job of staying on top of a rapidly moving, complex space. In most cases, the near real-time updating of OS versions, bug fixes, etc., can be included in the service-level agreement (SLA).
  

While mobility as a service is not widely deployed today in large enterprises, it is expected to grow rapidly in the coming year.

A recent IDC survey of 309 IT and business professionals for large enterprises in the United States and the United Kingdom, responsible for enterprise mobility purchase decisions, found that only 9% of organizations have already embarked on a large-scale deployment of mobile SaaS-based solutions (see pie chart). However, the same respondents indicated a growing acceptance of this delivery model for extending enterprise applications to mobile devices. Almost 40% of organizations plan to deploy a SaaS-based mobile solution in the next 12-18 months. Another 19.7% have already done a pilot and plan to roll out a larger deployment in the next 12-18 months. Furthermore, 15.5% of organizations have no plans to roll out any aspect of mobile SaaS-based solutions in the next 12-18 months, with another 8.4% that did run a pilot but have no plans to roll the solution out to other employees.

Of course, this does not mean that all on-premises solutions will be displaced, as many organizations will likely run on-premises solutions for certain applications that may need to be more customized or strategic in nature, or deal with data that is very sensitive, particularly if it is in a highly regulated industry. But, overall, the advantages of a SaaS-based model for mobile deployments align well with the needs of mobile workers and the IT departments supporting them.

Lately, my sister has been trying to convince her employer--a non-profit that supports freedom and democracy around the world--to allow its employees to work flexible hours, from anywhere (but most especially from home). She does project-based work that only occasionally requires direct input from co-workers--that is, she is the ideal candidate for workshifting. And still, she is having a tough time selling the idea upstairs.

In the process of making her case, my sister has come across an enormous amount of research about the value of workshifting (although to be fair, most of the studies don't call it that; see also, flextime, teleworking, etc.). Here's some of it:

• The Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp) reports that according to results of a 2009 study, "a full 84% of companies overall believe that flexible work arrangements in their organization boosts employee morale. That figure is up from 76% in a similar 2008 study conducted by i4cp. Correspondingly, the 2009 study showed that 78% of polled companies say flexwork options bolster retention rates, up from 64% the previous year."
  
  
• A 2008 report from Corporate Voices for Working Families notes that in their 2007 survey of senior-level executives at large corporations:

• "Respondents reported an overwhelmingly positive experience with flexible work strategies;"

• "More then 75 percent of the business executives interviewed define flexible work strategies as an alternate time or location arrangement; for instance, a nonstandard 40-hour workweek or working from home;" and
   
• "The respondents, by a ratio of 9-to-1, report that flexible work strategies have a positive effect on helping organizations reach business goals
  
  
• In a 2009 letter of recommendations submitted to the Senate Staff Working Group on Workplace Flexibility, Corporate Voices cites, "Our 50 partner companies [including Booz Allen Hamilton, HP, and KPMG LLP] understand that flexible work arrangements, for both salaried and hourly employees, contribute to more productive work environments, increased employee loyalty, reduced stress, and as a result, increased profitability and global competitiveness."
  
  
• IBM has seen a dramatic savings due to its support of telecommuting.  As of October 2007, according to a FinancialWeek article of that month, 40% of IBM's 355,000 employees are mobile workers. The magazine reports, "The company estimates that its mobile workforce reduces its real estate requirements by at least 2 million square feet, saving IBM about $100 million a year."
  
  
• Families and Work Institute (FWI) reports in their study The Impact of the Recession on Employers, "fully 81% of employers have maintained existing flexible work options during the recession and 13% have actually increased those options, while 6% have reduced them.
  

Even Michelle Obama is a believer in workshifting: Speaking at a Corporate Voices conference in May 2009, Obama stressed that her own personal experiences support Corporate Voices' research. The Washington Post reported that Obama said, "I found that as I've managed staff, the more flexibility and opportunities that I gave them to be good parents, the more commitment that they made to working with me, the less likely they were to leave because they wouldn't find the same sort of situation somewhere else." She added, "So this isn't just about family balance. This is about making work places stronger and more effective, and keeping and attracting the most qualified people."

As someone who's been workshifting for 15 years, I couldn't agree more--and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that my sister is successful in her fight for the freedom to be happier, healthier and more productive!