Remote work

"Work from home" and "WFH" redirect here. For other uses, see Work from Home (disambiguation) and WFH (disambiguation).

Remote work (also called telecommuting, telework, work from home, hybrid work, and other terms) is the practice of working from one's home or another space rather than from an office.

Percentage of workforce that was home-based in 2019

Most respondents to the same climate survey in 2021-2022 believe that most of us will be working from home in 20 years to help save the planet.

The United States Marine Corps began allowing remote work in 2010.

The practice began at a small scale in the 1970s, when technology was developed that linked satellite offices to downtown mainframes through dumb terminals using telephone lines as a network bridge. It became more common in the 1990s and 2000s, facilitated by internet technologies such as collaborative software on cloud computing and conference calling via videotelephony. In 2020, workplace hazard controls for COVID-19 catalyzed a rapid transition to remote work for white-collar workers around the world, which largely persisted even after restrictions were lifted.

Proponents of remote work argue that it reduces costs associated with maintaining an office, grants employees autonomy and flexibility that improves their motivation and job satisfaction, eliminates environmental harms from commuting, allows employers to draw from a more geographically diverse pool of applicants, and allows employees to relocate to a place they would prefer to live.

Opponents of remote work argue that remote telecommunications technology has been unable to replicate the advantages of face-to-face interaction, that employees may be more easily distracted and may struggle to maintain separation between work and non-work spheres without the physical separation, and that the reduced social interaction may lead to feelings of isolation.

History

In the early 1970s, technology was developed that linked satellite offices to downtown mainframes through dumb terminals using telephone lines as a network bridge. The terms "telecommuting" and "telework" were coined by Jack Nilles in 1973.^[1][2] In 1979, five IBM employees were allowed to work from home as an experiment. By 1983, the experiment was expanded to 2,000 people. By the early 1980s, branch offices and home workers were able to connect to organizational mainframes using personal computers and terminal emulators.

In 1995, the motto that "work is something you do, not something you travel to" was coined.^[3] Variations of this motto include: "Work is what we do, not where we are."^[4]

Since the 1980s, the normalization of remote work has been on a steady incline. For example, the number of Americans working from home grew by 4 million from 2003 to 2006,^[5] and by 1983 academics were beginning to experiment with online conferencing.^[6]

In the 1990s and 2000s, remote work became facilitated by technology such as collaborative software, virtual private networks, conference calling, videotelephony, internet access, cloud computing, voice over IP (VoIP), mobile telecommunications technology such as a Wi-Fi-equipped laptop or tablet computers, smartphones, and desktop computers, using software such as Zoom, Webex, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, Slack, and WhatsApp.

In his 1992 travelogue Exploring the Internet, Carl Malamud described a "digital nomad" who "travels the world with a laptop, setting up FidoNet nodes."^[7] In 1993, Random House published the Digital Nomad's Guide series of guidebooks by Mitch Ratcliffe and Andrew Gore. The guidebooks, PowerBook, AT&T EO Personal Communicator, and Newton's Law, used the term "digital nomad" to refer to the increased mobility and more powerful communication and productivity technologies that facilitated remote work.^[8][9][10]

European hacker spaces of the 1990s led to coworking; the first such space opened in 2005.^[11]

In 2010, the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 required each executive agency in the United States to establish policy allowing remote work to the maximum extent possible, so long as employee performance is not diminished.^[12][13][14]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of workers began remote work for the first time.^[15] Cities in which the population of remote workers increased significantly were referred to as Zoom towns.^[16] According to a U.S. Labor Department study published, millions of Americans ceased working from home by 2022, and the number of employers reporting teleworking decreasing to the level before pandemic levels. From August to September 2022, approximately 72 percent of private-sector businesses reported little to no telework among workers, compared to roughly 60 percent from July to September 2021.^[17] In 1996, the Home Work Convention, an International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention, was created to offer protection to workers who are employed in their own homes. During the Information Age, many startups were founded in the houses of entrepreneurs who lacked financial resources.

Remote work during COVID-19

A 2020 study of the then-ongoing pandemic estimated that 93% of world workers lived in countries with some sort of workplace closure. This figure was composed of: 32% living in countries with required closures for all but essential workplaces; 42% in countries where specific firms or worker categories had been closed; and 19% in countries with only recommended workplace closures.^[18]

The extensive use of remote work under COVID-19 constituted a major organizational transformation. However, the implementation of remote work during COVID-19 was hurried, and new technologies and operating systems had to be implemented without previous testing or training.^[19] Organisations reported concerns about losses in culture and productivity whilst workers were more concerned about declines in social interactions,^[20] internet connectivity and increased workload.^[21] Additionally, 25% of remote-working Americans were resistant to employer mandates to return to in-office work.^[22]

The abrupt transition to remote work during the pandemic led to an increase in both physical and mental health issues among workers; a lack of dedicated workspaces and distractions from others in the home were common negative influences on health and well-being, while effective communication with coworkers was supportive of health and well-being.^[23] The transition also increased the amount of time that individuals spent sitting at a workstation by up to 2 hours more per day, yet, most workers indicated being as productive working remotely as compared to office work before the pandemic.^[24] Supporting workers to identify effective approaches for boundary management between home and work across physical spaces, social interactions, and use of time are critical.^[25]

The transition to remote work during the pandemic highlighted the importance of access and equity among individual workers to support productivity and well-being. The remote work arrangement during COVID-19 was better for higher-paid and higher-management personnel in terms of productivity and reported well-being; whereas, individuals at the bottom end of the earning spectrum experience reduced remuneration.^[26] Utility bills also increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in an inconsistent manner. Utility bills for minorities and lower income individuals were more likely to increase because they lived in housing that was older, with less effective insulation and without energy-efficient appliances. The increase in electricity also came due to the people using their utilities at different times of the day.^[27]

Statistics

 

36% of Europeans interviewed by the European Investment Bank Climate Survey supported remote work to be favoured to fight climate change.

In 2020, 12.3% of employed persons, including 13.2% of women and 11.5% of men, in the European Union who were aged 15–64, usually worked from home. By country, the percentage of workers that worked from home was highest in Finland (25.1%), Luxembourg (23.1%), Ireland (21.5%), Austria (18.1%), and the Netherlands (17.8%) and lowest in Bulgaria (1.2%), Romania (2.5%), Croatia (3.1%), Hungary (3.6%), and Latvia (4.5%).^[28]

In 2023, economist and telework expert Nicholas Bloom said about a third of all working days are remote, slashing corporate real estate expenditures, and up from 5% before the pandemic.^[29] Bloom believes quickly progressing technology has facilitated and will continue the trend, but drawbacks for some kinds of positions will remain.

A September 2022 study surveyed workers from 26 countries in mid-2021 and early 2022. Its respondents WFH on average 1.5 days p/w.^[30]

United States

According to a Gallup poll in September 2021, 45% of full-time U.S. employees worked from home, including 25% who worked from home all of the time and 20% who worked from home part of the time. 91% of those who work remotely (fully or partially) hoped to continue to do so after the pandemic. Among all workers, 54% believed that their company's culture would be unchanged by remote work, while 12% believed it would improve and 33% predicted it would deteriorate.^[31]

Gallup found in February 2023 that, among remote-capable employees in the U.S., 20% worked on-site, 28% exclusively remote and 52% hybrid.^[32]

According to the United States Office of Personnel Management, 50% of all U.S. federal workers were eligible to work remotely and agencies saved more than $180 million because of remote work in fiscal 2020.^[33]

A September 2022 study^[a] surveyed workers in mid-2021 and early 2022. Its 2,079 US subjects WFH on average 1.6 days p/w, similar to the global average of 1.5 days p/w.^[30]

United Kingdom

These results may vary based on the type of sample collected. Certain groups may have fewer office-workers, e.g., in more urban locations or industries requiring more manual labour. As such groups may find remote working impossible, their presence or absence in these samples may affect the analysis.

A June 2022 survey^[b] of 56 offices found that 51% had no policy requiring office attendance, 18% requiring 2 days p/w, 11% requiring 3 days p/w, and 20% had policy set at team-level.^[34]

A September 2022 study^[c] surveyed workers in mid-2021 and early 2022. Its 1,501 UK subjects WFH on average 2 days p/w - above the global average of 1.5 days p/w.^[30]

An April 2023 survey of 558 central London workers' requirements for onsite working found the most common response was 2 and 3 days p/w at 26% and 21% of responses respectively. Fewer cited 1, 4, and 5 days, each making 8 - 11% of responses. Having no requirement was second-most common at 25% of responses. It also found that about 18% of vacancies listed by London companies in February 2023 were hybrid or remote, up from about 4% in February 2020.^[35][36]

An early 2023 survey of 2,049 workers found that 35% must work onsite for 2 days, 33% for 3 days, and 33% always WFH. In a separate question, 7% said their employer does not allow hybrid working.^[37]

A March 2023 survey of 2,016 adults found a roughly even distribution of required onsite days p/w peaking at 2 and 3 days at about 16% each. However it found a large spike in 5 days p/w, the most common response at over 35%. About 13% were required to work fewer than 1 day p/w.^[38]

Countering the above results suggesting a peak around 2-3 days p/w, an April 2023 survey of 1,000 office workers found a peak of 5 days p/w required onsite. Requirements for fewer days were progressively rarer, culminating in 0% saying they must work onsite less than once per month.^{[39][unreliable source?]}

A May 2022 survey by the Office for National Statistics found that 14% of working arrangements were fully remote, 24% were hybrid, and 46% were fully onsite.^[40]

A June 2023 survey of 2,000 full-time workers found that 6% of working arrangements were fully remote, 46% were hybrid, and 48% were fully onsite.^[41]

Potential benefits

Cost reduction

Remote work can reduce costs for organizations, including the cost of office space and related expenses such as parking, computer equipment, furniture, office supplies, lighting and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning.^[42] Certain employee expenses, such as office expenses, can be shifted to the remote worker, although this is the subject of lawsuits.^[43]

Remote work also reduces costs for the worker such as costs of travel/commuting^[44][45] and clothing.^[46] It also allows for the possibility of living in a cheaper area than that of the office.^[47]

Higher employee motivation and job satisfaction due to autonomy and flexibility

Consistent with job characteristic theory (1976), an increase in autonomy and feedback for employees leads to higher work motivation, satisfaction with personal growth opportunities, general job satisfaction, higher job performance, and lower absenteeism and turnover. Autonomy increased remote workers' satisfaction by reducing work-family conflicts, especially when workers were allowed to work outside traditional work hours and be more flexible for family purposes. Autonomy was the reason for an increase in employee engagement when the amount of time spent remote working increased. Remote workers have more flexibility and can shift work to different times of day and different locations to maximize their performance. The autonomy of remote work allows for arrangement of work to reduce work-family conflict and conflicts with recreational activities. However, studies also show that autonomy must be balanced with high levels of discipline if a healthy work/leisure balance is to be maintained.^[48][49]

Remote work may make it easier for workers to balance their work responsibilities with their personal life and family roles such as caring for children or elderly parents. Remote work improves efficiency by reducing travel time, and reduces commuting time and time stuck in traffic congestion, improving quality of life.^[45][50]

Providing the option to work remotely or adopting a hybrid work schedule has been an incentivizing benefit companies used in new hiring.^[51]

Hybrid is a flexible work model that allows employees to split their time between working in the office and working from home.

A 2007 meta-analysis of 46 studies of remote work involving 12,833 employees conducted by Ravi Gajendran and David A. Harrison in the Journal of Applied Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association (APA), found that remote work has largely positive effects on employees' job satisfaction, perceived autonomy, stress levels, manager-rated job performance, and (lower) work-family conflict, and lower turnover intention.^[52][53]

Environmental benefits

See also: Mobility transition

Remote work can reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, with fewer cars on the roads.

Most studies find that remote work overall results in: a decrease in energy use due to less time spent on energy-intensive personal transportation,^[54] cleaner air,^[55] and a reduction of electricity usage due to a lower office space footprint.^[56]

During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the increase in remote work led to a decrease in global CO₂ emissions.^[57] Partially due to the decrease in car commuting, carbon emissions dropped by 5.4%, however emissions immediately increased to the same rate in the following year.^[58]

The increase in remote work had also led to people moving out of cities and into larger homes which catered for home office space.^[59]

Increased productivity

Remote work has long been promoted as a way to substantially increase employee productivity. A 2013 study showed a 13% increase in productivity among remotely working call-center employees at a Chinese travel agency. An analysis of data collected through March 2021 found that nearly six out of 10 workers reported being more productive working from home than they expected to be, compared with 14% who said they got less done.^[60]

Since work hours are less regulated in remote work, employee effort and dedication are far more likely to be measured purely in terms of output or results. However, traces of non-productive work activities (such as: research, self-training, dealing with technical problems or equipment failures), and time lost on unsuccessful attempts (such as: early drafts, fruitless endeavors, abortive innovations), are visible to employers.^{[citation needed]}

Remote work improves efficiency by reducing or eliminating employees commute time, thus increasing their availability to work.^[61][45] In addition, remote work also helps employees achieve a better work-life balance.^[62]

An increase in productivity is also supported by sociotechnical systems (STS) theory (1951), which states that, unless absolutely essential, there should be minimal specification of objectives and how to do tasks in order to avoid inhibiting options or effective actions.^[63][64][65] Remote work provides workers with the freedom and power to decide how and when to do their tasks and therefore can increase productivity.^[53]

Lower turnover intention and higher loyalty

Turnover intention, or the desire to leave an organization, is lower for remote workers.^[53][42][52] Remote workers who experienced greater professional isolation actually had lower turnover intention.^[66]

A study of workers in 27 countries surveyed in mid-2021 and early 2022 found they would on average be willing to sacrifice 5% of their pay to be able to WFH 2-3 days p/w. 26% would quit immediately or seek a new job if they were required to work 5+ days p/w.^[30]

A 2017 study showed that companies that offered remote work options experienced a 25% lower turnover rate.^[67]

Surveys by FlexJobs found that 81% of respondents said they would be more loyal to their employers if they had flexible work options.^[68] In a 2021 study by McKinsey & Company, more than half of the workers supported companies adopting a hybrid work model, and more than a quarter stated that they would consider switching jobs if their current employer eliminated remote work options.^[69]

A 2021 employee survey report preferring a more flexible working model. During the COVID-19 pandemic the working model showed the amount of employees who are working fully on site is 62%, with 30% Hybrid and 8% remote. Post COVID-19 pandemic working models changed with the amount of employees who were fully on site is 37%, with 52% Hybrid and 11% are remote.^[70]

Access to more employees / employers

Remote work allows employees and employers to be matched despite major location differences.^[47]

Working responsibility is given to the employee is skilled in that area of work.^[71]

Relocation opportunity

Remote workers may have the opportunity to relocate to another city or state for potential job opportunities and or lower cost of living. A 2020 survey found that 2.4% of people or 4.9 million Americans say they have moved because of remote work in 2020.^[72]

Potential drawbacks and concerns

Drawbacks due to reduced face-to-face interactions

The technology to communicate is not advanced enough to replicate face-to-face office interactions. Room for mistakes and miscommunication can increase. According to media richness theory (1986), face-to-face interactions provide the capacity to process rich information: ambiguous issues can be clarified, immediate feedback can be provided, and there is personalized communication (e.g. body language, tone of voice).^[73]

Remote work requires the use of various types of media to communicate, such as videotelephony, telephone, and email, which have drawbacks such as time lags, or ease of deciphering emotions and can reduce the speed and ease at which decisions are made.^[47] Asynchronous communication tends to be more difficult to manage and requires much greater coordination than synchronous communication.^[74] A phenomenon of "Zoom fatigue" has set in with amount of video meetings popularized by remote working. There have been four causes identified: The size of the faces on the screen and amount of eye contact required, looking at yourself during the video call is tiring, remaining still during the video call to stay in the screen, and communicating without gestures and non-verbal cues.^[75]

Face-to-face interactions increase interpersonal contact, connectedness, and trust.^[66]

In a 2012 study, 54% of remote workers thought they lost out on social interaction and 52.5% felt they lost out on professional interaction.^[76]

Remote working can hurt working relationships between remote workers and their coworkers, especially if their coworkers do not work remotely. Coworkers who do not work remotely can feel resentful and envious because they may consider it unfair if they are not allowed to work remotely as well. Remote workers miss out on in person companionship and do not benefit from on-site perks.^[77][53][78]

Adaptive structuration theory studies variations in organizations as new technologies are introduced^[79] Adaptive structural theory proposes that structures (general rules and resources offered by the technology) can differ from structuration (how people actually use these rules and resources).^[63] There is an interplay between the intended use of technology and the way that people use the technology. Remote work provides a social structure that enables and constrains certain interactions.^[80] For instance, in office settings, the norm may be to interact with others face-to-face. To accomplish interpersonal exchange in remote work, other forms of interaction need to be used. AST suggests that when technologies are used over time, the rules and resources for social interactions will change.^[79] Remote work may alter traditional work practices,^[63] such as switching from primarily face-to-face communication to electronic communication.

Sharing information within an organization and teams can become more challenging when working remotely. While in the office, teams naturally share information and knowledge when they meet each other, for example, during coffee breaks. Sharing information requires more effort and proactive action when random-encounters do not happen.^[81] The sharing of tacit information also often takes place in unplanned situations where employees follow the activities of more experienced team members.^[82]

With remote work, it may also be difficult to obtain timely information, unless the regular sharing of information is taken care of separately. The situation where team members don't know enough about what others are doing can lead them to make worse decisions or slow down decision-making.

From an anthropological perspective, remote work can interfere with the process of sensemaking, the forging of consensus or of a common worldview, which involves absorbing a wide range of signals.^[83]

Feedback increases employees' knowledge of results. Feedback refers to the degree that an individual receives direct and clear information about his or her performance related to work activities.^[84] Feedback is particularly important so that the employees continuously learn about how they are performing.^[85] Electronic communication provides fewer cues for remote workers and thus, they may have more difficulties interpreting and gaining information, and subsequently, receiving feedback.^[86] When a worker is not in the office, there is limited information and greater ambiguity, such as in assignments and expectations.^[87] Role ambiguity, when situations have unclear expectations as to what the worker is to do,^[88] may result in greater conflict, frustration, and exhaustion.^[86] In other studies regarding Job Characteristics Theory, job feedback seemed to have the strongest relationship with overall job satisfaction compared to other job characteristics.^[89] While remote working, communication is not as immediate or rich as face-to-face interactions.^[73] Less feedback when remote working is associated with lower job engagement.^[86] Thus, when perceived supervisor support and relationship quality between leaders and remote workers decreases, job satisfaction of the remote worker decreases.^[90][91] The importance of manager communication with remote workers is made clear in a study that found that individuals have lower job satisfaction when their managers remote work.^[87] The clarity, speed of response, richness of the communication, frequency, and quality of the feedback are often reduced when managers remote work.^[87] Although the level of communication may decrease for remote workers, satisfaction with this level of communication can be higher for those who are more tenured and have functional instead of social relationships or those that have certain personalities and temperaments.^[92][93][94]

Social information processing suggests that individuals give meaning to job characteristics.^[95] Individuals have the ability to construct their own perception of the environment by interpreting social cues.^[96] This social information comes from overt statements from coworkers, cognitive evaluations of the job or task dimensions, and previous behaviors. This social context can affect individuals' beliefs about the nature of the job, the expectations for individual behavior, and the potential consequences of behavior, especially in uncertain situations.^[96] In remote work, there are fewer social cues because social exchange and personalized communication takes longer to process in computer-mediated communication than face-to-face interactions.^[97]

Lessened work motivation

Skill variety has the strongest relationship with internal work motivation.^[89] Jobs that allow workers to use a variety of skills increase workers' internal work motivation. If remote workers are limited in teamwork opportunities and have fewer opportunities to use a variety of skills,^[98] they may have lower internal motivation towards their work. Also, perceived social isolation can lead to less motivation.^[76]

Motivator-hygiene theory^[99] differentiates between motivating factors (motivators) and dissatisfying factors (hygienes). Factors that are motivators such as recognition and career advancement may be lessened with remote work. When remote workers are not physically present, they may be "out of sight, out of mind" to other workers in the office.^[78]

Not being in the office face-to-face can lead to workers not being able to do their work to the fullest potential because of lack of encouragement.^[100]

Distractions

Though working in an office has its distractions, it is often argued that remote work involves even greater distractions.^[47] According to one study, children are ranked as the number one distractions, followed by spouses, pets, neighbors, and solicitors. The lack of proper tools and facilities also serves as a major distraction,^{[101][better source needed]} though this can be mitigated by using short-term coworking rental facilities. Also, some countries such as Romania have tasked the national labour inspectorate the burden of carrying out checks at remote workers' residences to see if the work environment meets the requirements.^[102] Workers may be more distracted due to a lack of monitoring, therefore lowering productivity.^[71]

Women burdening an unfair share of domestic work

See also: Double burden

Remote working may prove consequential for workers faced with a large burden of responsibilities at home. Analyses of 2010^[103] and 2020-21^[104][105] UK survey data suggest women are more likely to face a disproportionate share of domestic work.

A 2022 study surveyed 283 Austrian remote workers cohabiting with their intimate partner in mid-2020. Women with children in their household perceived the home office environment as significantly more exhausting, bearing longer working hours and blurred boundaries than their counterparts without children. Women without children in their household had positive outcomes when WFH due to better concentration.^[106]

A September 2022 study surveyed workers from 26 countries in mid-2021 and early 2022. It found that women valued the option to WFH more than men in almost all countries. Likewise, in most countries, both men and women with children valued WFH more than their counterparts without children.^[107]

Employee pressure to be seen as valuable

Remote workers may feel pressure to produce more output in order to be seen as valuable, and reduce the idea that they are doing less work than others. This pressure to produce output, as well as a lack of social support from limited coworker relationships and feelings of isolation, leads to lower job engagement in remote workers.^[86] Additionally, higher-quality relationships with teammates decreased job satisfaction of remote workers, potentially because of frustrations with exchanging interactions via technology.^[108] However, coworker support and virtual social groups for team building had a direct influence on increasing job satisfaction,^[109][110] perhaps due to an increase in skill variety from teamwork and an increase in task significance from more working relationships.

The inconsistent findings regarding remote work and satisfaction may be explained by a more complicated relationship. Presumably because of the effects of autonomy, initial job satisfaction increases as the amount of remote work increases; however, as remote work increases, declines in feedback and task significance lead job satisfaction to level off and decrease slightly.^[111] Thus, the amount of remote work influences the relationship between remote work and job satisfaction. Barriers to the continued growth of remote work include distrust from employers and personal disconnectedness for employees.^[112]

Working in the office with other workers could increase the potential of the worker.^[113]

Challenges to team building; focus on the individual

Communication and getting to know other teammates happen naturally when everyone works in the same space, so with remote work, employees and supervisors have to work harder to maintain relationships with co-workers. This is especially important for new employees so that they learn organizational habits even when working remotely.^[114]

Skill variety, task identity, and task significance influence how much employees think their jobs are meaningful.^[85] Skill variety is the degree of activities and skills that a job requires in order to complete a task. An increase in skill variety is thought to increase the challenge of the job. Increasing the challenge of the job increases the individual's experienced meaningfulness, how much the individual cares about work, and finds it worthwhile.^[115][85] Remote work may not directly affect skill variety and task meaningfulness for the individual compared to when he or she worked in an office; however, skill variety and meaningfulness of individual tasks can increase when working in a group. If the work done at home is focused on the individual rather than the team, there may be fewer opportunities to use a variety of skills.^[98]

Task identity is the degree that the individual sees work from beginning to end or completes an identifiable or whole piece of work rather than only a small piece. Task significance is the degree that the individual feels his or her work has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people within the organization or outside the organization.^[85][98] Remote work may not change the job characteristics of skill variety, task identity, and task significance compared to working in an office; however, the presence of these characteristics will influence remote workers' work outcomes and attitudes.

In his book Together: The Healing Power Of Human Connection In A Sometimes Lonely World, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy asserts that face-to-face meetings, in-person collaboration, and "micro-moments" of community at work are what give people the essential feeling of belongingness and being part of a team.^[116][117]

Isolation and mental health

Research by Julianne Holt-Lunstad, a psychologist and professor at Brigham Young University, showed the most important predictor of living a long life is social integration.^[116][118]

A study by researchers at the University of Chicago showed that routine interactions with people benefits mental health.^[116][119]

In a 2018 study, Sigal G. Barsade, an organizational behavior professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, found that lonelier employees feel less committed to their employers and also to their co-workers.^[116][120]

Isolation due to remote work also hinders formation of friendships.^[121][47]

Although several scholars and managers had previously expressed fears that employee careers might suffer and workplace relationships might be damaged because of remote work, a 2007 study found that there are no generally detrimental effects on the quality of workplace relationships and career outcomes. Remote work actually was found to positively affect employee-supervisor relations and the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intent was in part due to supervisor relationship quality. Only high-intensity remote work (where employees work from home for more than 2.5 days a week) harmed employee relationships with co-workers, even though it did reduce work-family conflict.^[52][53]

Individuals may differ in their reactions to the job characteristics in remote work. According to job characteristics theory, the personal need for accomplishment and development ("growth need strength")^[84] influences how much an individual will react to the job dimensions of remote work. For instance, those individuals high in "growth need strength" will have a more positive reaction to increased autonomy and a more negative reaction to decreased feedback in remote work than those individuals low in "growth need strength".

A 2021 report from Prudential found that the majority of people prefer the hybrid model, and that two in three workers believe in-person interactions are important for career growth. The report also found that fully remote workers felt less entitled to take a vacation and believed they must be available around the clock. One in four workers felt isolated, and reported this as a major challenge. Ultimately, most workers want flexibility but do not want to give up the benefits available from working in-person with colleagues.^[122]

Information security

Employees need training, tools, and technologies for remote work. Remote work poses cybersecurity risks and people should follow best practices that include using antivirus software, keeping family members away from work devices, covering their webcams, using a VPN, using a centralized storage solution, making sure passwords are strong and secure, and being wary of email scams and email security.^[123]

In 2021, Vermont, South Carolina, South Dakota, Alabama, and Nebraska were named as the top 5 safest states for remote workers based on data breaches, stolen records, privacy laws, victim count, and victim loss.^[124]

A 2020 survey of over 1,000 remote workers showed that 59% of employees felt more cyber secure working in-office compared to at home.^[125]

Technology or equipment issues

Employees having inadequate equipment or technology can prevent work from getting done. A FlexJobs survey found 28% had technical problems and 26% reported WI-FI issues.^[75]

Loss of control by management

Additionally, remote work may not always be seen positively by management due to fear of loss of managerial control.^[126] A study found that managers had a bias against employees who did not work in the office. Manager attributed the amount of time they saw an employee in the office more than the work than the contribution that was made.^[77]

Alleged drop in worker productivity

There have been conflicting data on the correlation between remote work and productivity. Some studies have found that remote work increases worker productivity^[127] and leads to higher supervisor ratings of performance and higher performance appraisals.^[53] However, another study found that professional isolation in remote workers led to a decrease in job performance, especially for those who spent more time remote working and engaged in fewer face-to-face interactions.^[66] Thus, similar to job attitudes, the amount of time spent remote working may also influence the relationship between remote work and job performance.

There may be a drop in remote worker productivity, which could be due to inadequate office setup.^[128] However, surveys found that over two-thirds of employers reported increased productivity among remote workers.^{[citation needed]}

Traditional line managers are accustomed to managing by observation and not necessarily by results. This causes a serious obstacle in organizations attempting to adopt remote work. Liability and workers' compensation can become serious issues as well.^[129]

A 2008 study found that more time spent remote working decreased the perception of productivity of the remote worker by management.^[66]

Envy in the workplace

Workers who do not have remote work privileges may be envious of those who do, leading to workplace controversies.^[130]

Taxation complexity

Remote workers are subject to taxation based on a combination of factors including their residence, the location of their employer, and the specific tax laws of the relevant jurisdictions. Generally, remote workers are taxed in accordance with the rules and regulations of the jurisdiction in which they reside. Additionally, tax treaties between countries may impact the taxation of remote workers, providing guidelines to avoid double taxation. It is essential for remote workers to understand the tax laws and regulations applicable to their situation, and they may benefit from seeking guidance from tax professionals or consulting the relevant tax authorities to ensure compliance with tax obligations.^[131]

Tax implications of working remotely in a different jurisdiction than the employer are often not fully understood by remote workers.^[132][133]

Health impacts due to increased hours working

According to a 2021 report by the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization, remote work could potentially increase health loss among workers if it increases working time to over 55 hours per week.^[134] Increased working hours include compromised health, well-being, and sleep as a consequence of disruption of the daily life routine, anxiety, worry, isolation, greater family and work stress, and excessive screen time.^[20]

See also

•  Business portal
•  Society portal
•  Telecommunications portal

• Asynchronous communication – Transmission of data at irregular intervals
• Canadian Telework Association – Organization promoting telework and telecommuting in Canada
• Comparisons
  • Comparison of cross-platform instant messaging clients
  • Comparison of file hosting services
  • Comparison of FTP client software
  • Comparison of office suites
  • Comparison of web conferencing software
• Coworking – people working independently sharing a common working area
• Digital nomad – someone that works remotely while traveling and living a nomadic lifestyle
• Distributed company - company where all employees are physically distributed and engage in remote work
• Distributed development – Research and development done across many locations
• Distance education – Mode of delivering education to students who are not physically present
• Distributed workforce – conduct of organizational tasks in places that extend beyond the confines of traditional offices or workspaces
• Desktop virtualization – ability to access legacy applications or operating systems from a remote device
• Digital divide – Inequality of access to information and communication technologies
• E-lancing
• Environmental impact of transport
• Flexible work arrangement – Type of work arrangement
• Flextime – Flexible hours schedule in workdays
• Home Work Convention – International Labour Organization Convention
• Homeshoring – In British English, when the initiative comes from the company, the terms "homeshoring" and "homesourcing" are sometimes used.^[135]
• Hot desking – Office organization system
• Hoteling – Some companies, particularly those where employees spend a great deal of time on the road and at remote locations, offer a hotdesking or hoteling arrangement where employees can reserve the use of a temporary traditional office, cubicle or meeting room at the company headquarters, a remote office center, or other shared office facility.
• Job characteristic theory – Theory of work design
• Labour market flexibility – Speed with which labour markets adapt to changes
• Media richness theory – Framework describing a communication medium's ability to reproduce the information sent over it
• Outsourcing – Contracting formerly internal tasks to an external organization
• Putting-out system – Cottage industry
• Small office/home office – Category of business or cottage industry that involves from 1 to 10 workers
• Smart city – City using integrated information and communication technology
• Study (room) – Type of room in a house
• Telecentre – A public place where people can access digital technologies
• Virtual assistant
• Virtual business – Employs electronic means to do business as opposed to brick and mortar
• Virtual community of practice
• Virtual management – Supervision, leadership and maintenance of virtual teams
• Virtual team – Team whose members collaborate remotely
• Virtual volunteering – Online volunteering
• Virtual workplace – Workplace that is not located in any one physical space
• Work design – Area of research and practice within industrial and organizational psychology
• Work at home scheme – get-rich-quick schemes in which a victim is lured by an offer to be employed at home, very often doing some simple task in a minimal amount of time with a large amount of income that exceeds the market rate for the type of work
• Work–family conflict – Type of conflict
• Zoom town – community that is popular for remote workers

References

1. "Jack Nilles", jala.com, JALA International, September 26, 2011
2. Uy, Melanie (March 10, 2021). "Differences Between Telecommuting and Telework". Lifewire.
3. Woody, Leonhard (1995). The Underground Guide to Telecommuting. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 978-0-201-48343-7.
4. "Mobile Worker Toolkit: A Notional Guide" (PDF). General Services Administration.
5. Gajendran, Ravi; Harrison, David (2007). "The Good, The Bad, and the Unknown About Telecommuting: Meta-Analysis of Psychological Mediators and Individual Consequences" (PDF). Journal of Applied Psychology. 92 (6): 1524–1541. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524. PMID 18020794. S2CID 6030172. Retrieved February 17, 2022.
6. Byrd, Nick (2021). "Online Conferences: Some History, Methods and Benefits". Right Research: Modelling Sustainable Research Practices in the Anthropocene: 435–462. doi:10.11647/OBP.0213.28. S2CID 241554841.
7. Malamud, Carl (September 1992). Exploring the Internet: A Technical Travelogue. Prentice Hall. p. 284. ISBN 0132968983.
8. Gore, Andrew; Ratcliffe, Mitch (1993). AT&T EO personal communicator: A Digital Nomad's Guide. Random House. ISBN 0-679-74695-1.
9. Gore, Andrew; Ratcliffe, Mitch (1993). PowerBook: A Digital Nomad's Guide. Random House. ISBN 0-679-74588-2.
10. Gore, Andrew; Ratcliffe, Mitch (1993). Newton's Law: A Digital Nomad's Guide. Random House. ISBN 0-679-74647-1.
11. Laura, Bliss (March 2018). "How WeWork Has Perfectly Captured the Millennial Id". The Atlantic.
12. "Telework legislation". U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
13. "H.R. 1722 (111th): Telework Enhancement Act of 2010". GovTrack.
14. "White House, Statement by the Press Secretary". whitehouse.gov. December 9, 2010 – via National Archives.
15. Chang, Andrea (November 12, 2020). "'Work from anywhere' is here to stay. How will it change our workplaces?". San Diego Union-Tribune.
16. Rosalsky, Greg (September 8, 2020). "Zoom Towns And The New Housing Market For The 2 Americas". NPR.
17. Sforza, Lauren (March 26, 2023). "Millions of Americans stopped working from home in 2022: Labor Dept". The Hill. Retrieved March 28, 2023.
18. "ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work. Fifth edition" (PDF). ILO Monitor on the world of work. January 8, 2024. (PDF) from the original on January 8, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
19. Kelly Jackson, Marice (March 2022). "Working remotely: How organizational leaders and HRD practitioners used the experiential learning theory during the COVID‐19 pandemic?". New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. 34 (2): 44–48. doi:10.1002/nha3.20351. PMC 9349552.
20. Majumdar, Piya; Biswas, Ankita; Sahu, Subhashis (2020). "COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown: Cause of sleep disruption, depression, somatic pain, and increased screen exposure of office workers and students of India". Chronobiology International. 37 (8): 1191–1200. doi:10.1080/07420528.2020.1786107. PMID 32660352. S2CID 220522398.
21. Marzban, Samin; Durakovic, Iva; Candido, Christhina; Mackey, Martin (2020). "Learning to work from home: experience of Australian workers and organizational representatives during the first Covid-19 lockdowns". Journal of Corporate Real Estate. 23 (3): 203–222. doi:10.1108/JCRE-10-2020-0049. hdl:11343/267996. S2CID 235900948.
22. "Workers are refusing to return to the office, and they are ready to face the consequences". ZDNET. Retrieved November 10, 2022.
23. Xiao, Yijing; Becerik-Gerber, Burcin; Lucas, Gale; Roll, Shawn C. (2021). "Impacts of Working from Home During COVID-19 Pandemic on Physical and Mental Well-Being of Office Workstation Users". Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 63 (3): 181–190. doi:10.1097/JOM.0000000000002097. PMC 7934324. PMID 33234875.
24. Awada, Mohamad; Lucas, Gale; Becerik-Gerber, Burcin; Roll, Shawn (2021). "Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: Impact on office worker productivity and work experience". Work. 69 (4): 1171–1189. doi:10.3233/WOR-210301. PMID 34420999. S2CID 237268855.
25. Fukumura, Yoko E.; Schott, Joseph M.; Lucas, Gale M.; Becerik-Gerber, Burcin; Roll, Shawn C. (2021). "Negotiating Time and Space when Working from Home: Experiences During COVID-19". Otjr: Occupation, Participation and Health. 41 (4): 223–231. doi:10.1177/15394492211033830. PMID 34315290. S2CID 236472297.
26. Barrero, Jose Maria; Bloom, Nicholas; Davis, Steven (April 2021). "Why Working from Home Will Stick". NBER Working Paper Series. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w28731. Working Paper 28731.
27. Calma, Justine (August 2, 2022). "The uneven energy costs of working from home". The Verge. Retrieved December 3, 2022.
28. "How usual is it to work from home?". Europa. May 17, 2021.
29. Bloom, Nicholas (February 10, 2023). Home is where the work is (video). The Future of Everything Podcast. Stanford University School of Engineering.
30. Aksoy, Cevat; Barrero, Jose; Bloom, Nicholas; Davis, Steven; Dolls, Mathias; Zarate, Pablo (September 2022). (PDF). NBER. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 8, 2024.
31. Saad, Lydia; Wigert, Ben (October 13, 2021). "Remote Work Persisting and Trending Permanent". Gallup. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
32. Goldberg, E. (2023, March 30). Do we know how many people are working from home? The New York Times. Retrieved on May 2, 2023. Gallup. Hybrid Work Indicators. Retrieved on May 2, 2023.
33. Wagner, Erich (January 7, 2022). "Report: 45% of All Federal Employees Teleworked in Fiscal 2020". Government Executive.
34. "AWA Hybrid Working Index 3" (PDF). advanced-workplace. January 8, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
35. Swinney, Paul; Graham, Daniel; Vera, Olivia; Anupriya; Hörcher, Daniel; Ojha, Surabhi (May 2023). "Office politics London and the rise of home working" (PDF). www.centreforcities.org. (PDF) from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
36. Swinney, Paul; Vera, Olivia (May 24, 2023). "Office politics: London and the rise of home working". www.centreforcities.org. from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
37. "Flexible and hybrid working practices in 2023 Employer and employee perspectives" (PDF). Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. May 2023. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
38. Ali, Vinous; Corfe, Scott; Norman, Amy; Wilson, Jude (September 13, 2023). "Hybrid Work Commission 2023" (PDF). www.publicfirst.co.uk. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
39. Bogunovic, Sofia (April 11, 2023). "Top hybrid work trend stats from companies in the UK for 2023". TravelPerk. from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2023.
40. "Is hybrid working here to stay?". Office for National Statistics. May 23, 2022. from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
41. "State of hybrid work 2023". Owl Labs. 2023. from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
42. Rojas, Benjamin (October 13, 2021). "How Remote Work Can Increase Business Profits". Forbes.
43. Miller, Stephen (June 17, 2022). "Lawsuits Put Spotlight on Paying Remote Workers' Expenses". Society for Human Resource Management.
44. DeVerter, Jeff (December 2, 2020). "In Defense Of Remote Work". Forbes.
45. Watad, Mahmoud M.; Jenkins, Gregory T. (December 4, 2010). "The Impact Of Telework On Knowledge Creation And Management". Journal of Knowledge Management Practice. 11 (4).
46. Madell, Robin (June 30, 2022). "Pros and Cons of Working From Home". U.S. News & World Report.
47. "How to Work From Home: Pros and Cons of Remote Work". MasterClass. September 7, 2021.
48. Yu, Jun; Wu, Yihong (December 2021). "The Impact of Enforced Working from Home on Employee Job Satisfaction during COVID-19: An Event System Perspective". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (24): 13207. doi:10.3390/ijerph182413207. PMC 8701258. PMID 34948823.
49. Cook, Dave (March 12, 2020). "The freedom trap: digital nomads and the use of disciplining practices to manage work/leisure boundaries". Information Technology & Tourism. 22 (3): 355–390. doi:10.1007/s40558-020-00172-4.
50. Ipsen, Christine; van Veldhoven, Marc; Kirchner, Kathrin; Hansen, John Paulin (January 2021). "Six Key Advantages and Disadvantages of Working from Home in Europe during COVID-19". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (4): 1826. doi:10.3390/ijerph18041826. PMC 7917590. PMID 33668505.
51. Ozimek, Adam; Stanton, Christopher (March 11, 2022). "Remote Work Has Opened the Door to a New Approach to Hiring". Harvard Business Review.
52. "Telecommuting has Mostly Positive Consequences for Employees and Employers, Say Researchers" (Press release). American Psychological Association. November 19, 2007.
53. Gajendran, Ravi S.; Harrison, David A. (2007). "The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences" (PDF). Journal of Applied Psychology. 92 (6): 1524–1541. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524. PMID 18020794. S2CID 6030172.
54. Hook, Andrew; Sovacool, Benjamin K.; Sorrell, Steve; Court, Victor (August 19, 2020). "A systematic review of the energy and climate impacts of teleworking". Environmental Research Letters. 15 (9): 093003. Bibcode:2020ERL....15i3003H. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab8a84. S2CID 218789818.
55. Dzombak, Rebecca (October 12, 2021). "Remote Work May Be Keeping Some Cities' Air Cleaner". American Geophysical Union.
56. Sahoo, Bibhu Prasad; Gulati, Ankita; Haq, Irfan Ul (2021). "COVID-19 & Prospects of Online Work from Home Using Technology: Case from India". International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering. 17 (9): 106. doi:10.3991/ijoe.v17i09.23929. S2CID 239072387.
57. Watts, Jonathan (March 10, 2020). "Coronavirus could cause fall in global CO2 emissions". The Guardian.
58. "Emission Reductions From Pandemic Had Unexpected Effects on Atmosphere". NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Retrieved June 8, 2022.
59. Holmes, Torik; Lord, Carolynne; Ellsworth-Krebs, Katherine (2021). "Locking-down instituted practices: Understanding sustainability in the context of 'domestic' consumption in the remaking" (PDF). Journal of Consumer Culture. 22 (4): 1049–1067. doi:10.1177/14695405211039616. S2CID 244184652.
60. Stropoli, Rebecca (August 18, 2021). "Are We Really More Productive Working from Home?". University of Chicago Booth School of Business.
61. "How remote work can be more productive than in-person work". Lucidchart. May 21, 2020.
62. Powell, Jessica (September 25, 2020). "Opinion | The Rise of Remote Work Can Be Unexpectedly Liberating". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
63. Torraco, Richard J. (March 9, 2005). "Work design theory: A review and critique with implications for human resource development". Human Resource Development Quarterly. 16: 85–109. doi:10.1002/hrdq.1125.
64. Trist, Eric Lansdown; Bamforth, K. W. (1951). "Some Social and Psychological Consequences of the Longwall Method of Coal-Getting". Human Relations. 4: 3–38. doi:10.1177/001872675100400101. S2CID 145434302.
65. Cherns, Albert (1987). "Principles of Sociotechnical Design Revisted". Human Relations. 40 (3): 153–161. doi:10.1177/001872678704000303. S2CID 145140507.
66. Golden, T. D.; Veiga, J. F.; Dino, R. N. (2008). "The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter?". Journal of Applied Psychology. 93 (6): 1412–1421. doi:10.1037/a0012722. PMID 19025257.
67. Nichols, Greg (October 4, 2017). "Companies that support remote work experience 25 percent lower employee turnover (and other findings)". ZDNet.
68. Pelta, Rachel. "FlexJobs Survey: Productivity, Work-Life Balance Improves During Pandemic". FlexJobs.
69. Alexander, Andrea; De Smet, Aaron; Langstaff, Meredith; Ravid, Dan (April 2021). "What employees are saying about the future of remote work" (PDF).
70. "Getting real about hybrid work | McKinsey". www.mckinsey.com. Retrieved November 20, 2022.
71. Hunter, Philip (January 2019). "Remote working in research: An increasing usage of flexible work arrangements can improve productivity and creativity". EMBO Reports. 20 (1). doi:10.15252/embr.201847435. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 6322359. PMID 30530631.
72. Ozimek, Adam (2022). "The New Geography of Remote Work". Upwork. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
73. Daft, Richard L.; Lengel, Robert H. (1986). "Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design". Management Science. 32 (5): 554–571. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554. JSTOR 2631846. S2CID 155016492.
74. Tsipursky, Gleb (October 18, 2023). "Poor Communication May Be Slowing Down Your Team". Harvard Business Review. Retrieved November 17, 2023.
75. "Disadvantages of Working From Home". The Balance. Retrieved December 4, 2022.
76. Maruyama, Takao; Tietze, Susanne (June 2012). "From anxiety to assurance: Concerns and outcomes of telework". Personnel Review. 41 (4): 450–469. doi:10.1108/00483481211229375.
77. Madell, Robin (June 30, 2022). "Pros and Cons of Working From Home". Retrieved February 12, 2022.
78. Morganson, V. J.; Major, D. A.; Oborn, K. L.; Verive, J.M; Heelan, M. P. (2010). "Comparing telework locations and traditional work arrangements: differences in work–life balance support, job satisfaction and inclusion". Journal of Managerial Psychology. 25 (6): 578–595. doi:10.1108/02683941011056941.
79. Desanctis, Gerardine; Poole, Marshall Scott (1994). "Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory". Organization Science. 5 (2): 121–147. doi:10.1287/orsc.5.2.121. S2CID 4625142.
80. Hill, N. Sharon; Bartol, Kathryn M.; Tesluk, Paul E.; Langa, Gosia A. (2009). "Organizational context and face-to-face interaction: Influences on the development of trust and collaborative behaviors in computer-mediated groups". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 108 (2): 187–201. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.10.002.
81. Azasu, Babatunde (2020). "Open-ended: Office space and remote working in the age of COVID-19". Journal of Property Management. 85: 34.
82. Engeström, Yrjö (2008). From Teams to Knots: Activity-Theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-139-46994-4.
83. Tett, Gillian (June 3, 2021). "The empty office: what we lose when we work from home". The Guardian.
84. Hackman, J. Richard; Lawler, Edward E. (1971). "Employee reactions to job characteristics". Journal of Applied Psychology. 55 (3): 259–286. doi:10.1037/h0031152.
85. Hackman, J. Richard; Oldham, Greg R. (1976). "Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory". Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 16 (2): 250–279. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7. S2CID 8618462.
86. Sardeshmukh, Shruti R.; Sharma, Dheeraj; Golden, Timothy D. (2012). "Impact of telework on exhaustion and job engagement: A job demands and job resources model". New Technology, Work and Employment. 27 (3): 193–207. doi:10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00284.x. S2CID 111077383.
87. Golden, Timothy D.; Fromen, Allan (2011). "Does it matter where your manager works? Comparing managerial work mode (Traditional, telework, virtual) across subordinate work experiences and outcomes". Human Relations. 64 (11): 1451–1475. doi:10.1177/0018726711418387. S2CID 145386665.
88. Sonnentag, Sabine; Frese, Michael (2003). "Stress in organizations". In W. C. Borman; D. R. Ilgen; R. J. Klimoski (eds.). Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 12. I. B. Weiner (Series Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 453–491.
89. Fried, Yitzhak; Ferris, Gerald R. (1987). "The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis". Personnel Psychology. 40 (2): 287–322. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00605.x.
90. Golden, T. D.; Veiga, J. F.; Simsek, Z. (2006). "Telecommuting's differential impact on work–family conflict: Is there no place like home?". Journal of Applied Psychology. 91 (6): 1340–1350. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1340. PMID 17100488.
91. Swanberg, J. E.; McKechnie, S. P.; Ojha, M. U.; James, J. B. (2011). "Schedule control, supervisor support and work engagement: A winning combination for workers in hourly jobs?". Journal of Vocational Behavior. 79 (3): 613–624. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.04.012.
92. Akkirman, Ali D.; Harris, Drew L. (June 2005). "Organizational communication satisfaction in the virtual workplace". Journal of Management Development. 24 (5): 397–409. doi:10.1108/02621710510598427.
93. Fritz, Mary Beth Watson; Narasimhan, Sridhar; Rhee, Hyeun-Suk (1998). "Communication and coordination in the virtual office". Journal of Management Information Systems. 14 (4): 7–28. doi:10.1080/07421222.1998.11518184. JSTOR 40398290.
94. Pickett, Cynthia L.; Gardner, Wendi L.; Knowles, Megan (September 1, 2004). "Getting a cue: The need to belong and enhanced sensitivity to social cues". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 30 (9): 1095–107. doi:10.1177/0146167203262085. PMID 15359014. S2CID 2007730.
95. Salancik, Gerald R.; Pfeffer, Jeffrey (1978). "A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design". Administrative Science Quarterly. 23 (2): 224–253. doi:10.2307/2392563. JSTOR 2392563. PMID 10307892.
96. Morgeson, F.P.; Campion, M.A. (2003). "Work design". In W. Bornman; D. Ilgen; R. Klimoksi (eds.). Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 12. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. pp. 423–452.
97. Walther, Joseph B. (1992). "Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction". Communication Research. 19: 52–90. doi:10.1177/009365092019001003. S2CID 145557658.
98. Shamir, Boas; Salomon, Ilan (1985). "Work-At-Home and the Quality of Working Life". Academy of Management Review. 10 (3): 455–464. doi:10.5465/amr.1985.4278957. JSTOR 258127.
99. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.B., (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley.
100. Felstead, Alan; Henseke, Golo (October 4, 2017). "Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, well-being and work-life balance". New Technology, Work and Employment. 32 (3): 195–212. doi:10.1111/ntwe.12097. ISSN 0268-1072. S2CID 117278071.
101. "4 Reasons Why Working From Home Can be Unproductive". Corporate Suites. June 19, 2015.
102. "Romania: law on teleworking approved". European Trade Union Institute (ETUI). June 10, 2020.
103. McMunn, Anne; Bird, Lauren; Webb, Elizabeth; Sacker, Amanda (April 2020). (PDF). Work, Employment and Society. 34 (2): 155–173. doi:10.1177/0950017019862153. ISSN 0950-0170. Archived from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024 – via Sage Journals.
104. Zamberlan, Anna; Gioachin, Filippo; Gritti, Davide (June 1, 2021). "Work less, help out more? The persistence of gender inequality in housework and childcare during UK COVID-19". Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 73: 100583. doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2021.100583. ISSN 0276-5624. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
105. Sánchez, Alejandra Rodríguez; Fasang, Anette; Harkness, Susan (December 16, 2021). (PDF). Demographic Research. 45: 1297–1316. ISSN 1435-9871. Archived from the original on January 9, 2024. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
106. Hartner-Tiefenthaler, Martina; Zedlacher, Eva; el Sehity, Tarek Josef (August 4, 2022). "Remote workers' free associations with working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria: The interaction between children and gender". Frontiers in Psychology. 13: 859020. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.859020. PMC 9391219. PMID 35996573.
107. Aksoy, Cevat; Barrero, Jose; Bloom, Nicholas; Davis, Steven; Dolls, Mathias; Zarate, Pablo (September 2022). (PDF). NBER. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 8, 2024.
108. Golden, T. D. (2006). "Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Telework and the intervening impact of work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions". Journal of Vocational Behavior. 69: 176–187. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2006.02.003. S2CID 143888296.
109. Bailey, Diane E.; Kurland, Nancy B. (2002). "A review of telework research: findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 23 (4): 383–400. doi:10.1002/job.144. S2CID 727943.
110. Ilozor, Doreen B.; Ilozor, Ben D.; Carr, John (2001). "Management communication strategies determine job satisfaction in telecommuting". Journal of Management Development. 20 (6): 495–507. doi:10.1108/02621710110399783.
111. Golden, Timothy D.; Veiga, John F. (2005). "The impact of extent of telecommuting on job satisfaction: Resolving inconsistent findings". Journal of Management. 31 (2): 301–318. doi:10.1177/0149206304271768. S2CID 14021410.
112. Rosenberg, Matt (September 26, 2007). "Slow But Steady "Telework Revolution" Eyed". Discovery Institute.
113. "20 Tips for Working From Home". PCMAG. Retrieved December 15, 2022.
114. Harpelund, Christian (January 21, 2019). Onboarding: Getting New Hires off to a Flying Start. Emerald Group Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78769-583-2.
115. Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2005). How job characteristics theory happened. In The Oxford handbook of management theory: The process of theory development, 151-170.
116. Crowley, Mark C. (November 30, 2021). "Remote work has a downside. Here's why I want to go back to the office". Fast Company. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
117. Murthy, Vivek (April 11, 2023). Together: The Healing Power of Human Connection in a Sometimes Lonely World. HarperCollins. ISBN 9780062913302.
118. Holt-Lunstad, Julianne (January 12, 2021). "A pandemic of social isolation?". World Psychiatry. Wiley Online Library. 20 (1): 55–56. doi:10.1002/wps.20839. PMC 7801834. PMID 33432754.
119. Steimer, Sarah (July 28, 2021). "How do cities impact mental health? A new study finds lower rates of depression". University of Chicago. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
120. Ozcelik, Hakan; Barsade, Sigal G. (2018). "No Employee an Island: Workplace Loneliness and Job Performance" (PDF). Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management. 61 (6): 2343–2366. doi:10.5465/amj.2015.1066. S2CID 149199657. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
121. Glaeser, Edward; Cutler, David (September 24, 2021). "You may get more work done at home. But you'd have better ideas at the office". The Washington Post.
122. "The Workplace in a Post-COVID World". McGuire Development Company. August 10, 2021.
123. "Cyber Security Risks: Best Practices for Working from Home and Remotely". Kaspersky Lab.
124. "The Safest States for Telecommuters". Verizon Resource Center. February 17, 2021.
125. Robinson, Bryan (June 19, 2020). "Is Working Remote A Blessing Or Burden? Weighing The Pros And Cons". Forbes.
126. Hartman, Richard I.; Stoner, Charles R.; Arora, Raj (1991). "An investigation of selected variables affecting telecommuting productivity and satisfaction". Journal of Business and Psychology. 6 (2): 207–225. doi:10.1007/bf01126709. JSTOR 25092331. S2CID 144736120.
127. Hill, E. Jeffrey; Ferris, Maria; Märtinson, V. (2003). "Does it matter where you work? A comparison of how three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and personal/family life". Journal of Vocational Behavior. 63 (2): 220–241. doi:10.1016/s0001-8791(03)00042-3.
128. "Remote Working: Understanding the Factors That Cause Low Employee Productivity". Apty. March 30, 2022.
129. Davenport, Thomas H.; Pearlson, Keri (July 15, 1998). "Two Cheers for the Virtual Office". MIT Sloan Management Review.
130. Miller, Karla L. (November 14, 2019). "My co-workers are grumbling about my remote working privileges". The Washington Post.
131. Stauffer, Jason. "Working remotely? Here are 4 things to pay attention to this tax season". CNBC. Retrieved June 8, 2023.
132. "AICPA/Harris Poll Reveals Many Taxpayers Unaware of State Tax Liabilities Related to Working Remotely" (Press release). AICPA. November 5, 2020.
133. Lea, Brittany De (November 10, 2020). "Many taxpayers could face surprise bill over remote work misconceptions, study finds". FOXBusiness.
134. Pega, Frank; Náfrádi, Bálint; et al. (May 17, 2021). "Global, regional, and national burdens of ischemic heart disease and stroke attributable to exposure to long working hours for 194 countries, 2000–2016: A systematic analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury". Environment International. 154: 106595. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2021.106595. PMC 8204267. PMID 34011457.
135. "Homeshoring". Macmillan English Dictionary.

1. This study also surveyed workers from 26 other countries. See citation (Aksoy 2022) for more.
2. This survey also studied Asia-Pacific, Latin America, North America, and the European Union to a lesser extent. See citation (AWA Hybrid Working Index 3) for those results.
3. This study also surveyed workers from 26 other countries. See citation (Aksoy 2022) for more.

Further reading

• "The 5th Annual State of Remote Work," OwlLabs and Global Workplace Analytics, 2022
• Working from Home: Unraveling the Employment Law Implications of the Remote Office, Journal of Labor and Employment, 2022
• Lessons Learned from Remote Working during COVID-19: Can Government Save Money Through Maximizing Efficient Use of Leased Space, Testimony presented to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, 2020
• The Business Case for Remote Work for Employers, Employees, the Environment, and Society; Global Workplace Analytics; 2020
• Global Work-from-Home Experience Survey Report, Iometrics & Global Workplace Analytics, 2020
• Pandemic Manual: Appendix 3—Optimizing Remote Work Programs, IFMA Foundation, 2020 ISBN 978-1-883176-49-5
• 'Telework in the 21st Century – An Evolutionary Perspective from Six Countries,' International Labor Organization, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019 ISBN 978-92-2-133367-8
• John O'Duinn, (2018) 'Distributed Teams: The Art and Practice of Working Together While Physically Apart,' ISBN 978-1-7322549-0-9
• Thomas L. Friedman, 'The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century.' 2005 ISBN 978-0-374-29288-1
• AWA Hybrid Working Index 3, August 2023^[1]
• Aksoy et al (2022) Working from Home around The World^[2]

External links

•   Learning materials related to telecommuting at Wikiversity
• Telecommuting at Curlie
• Lacy, Sarah (May 2, 2006). "Homeshoring: Beyond Call Centers Silicon Valley startup oDesk helps companies find -- and monitor -- at-home labor for a growing roster of jobs". Bloomberg News.

1. Cite error: The named reference :0 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
2. Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).