Remote work

Remote work (also called telecommuting, telework, work from or at home, WFH as an initialism, hybrid work, and other terms) is the practice of working at or from one's home or another space rather than from an office or workplace.
Working at home is not a new practice, but "remote working" for offices and factories activity began on a small scale in the 1970s, when technology was developed which could link 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 having a geographically distributed workforce 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.
Working at home is not a new practice. Between 1670 and 1826, management had to rely on trust and control to successfully manage distributed work. During this time, in addition to dispersed operations that relied heavily on a combination of explicit information and detailed record-keeping, more tacit and situated knowledge developed through socialization. For example, the Hudson's Bay Company showed a variety of control mechanisms including selection techniques, information requirements, and direct local oversight through its distributed practices of socialization, communication, and participation. Managers found that "common sense" was not enough to encourage everyone to comply.
The England and Wales census of 1911 included a question about each resident person's employment (if any) and included a question about whether they worked "at home".
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. 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. Variations of this motto include: "Work is what we do, not where we are."
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, and by 1983 academics were beginning to experiment with online conferencing.
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" as a person who "travels the world with a laptop, setting up FidoNet nodes." 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.
European hacker spaces of the 1990s led to coworking; the first such space opened in 2005. The new economy production no longer requires people to work together in the same physical space to access the tools and resources they need to produce their work and allows for distributed work.
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.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of workers began remote work for the first time. Cities in which the population of remote workers increased significantly were referred to as Zoom towns. 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. During the Information Age, many startups were founded in the homes of entrepreneurs who lacked financial resources.
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.
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. Organizations reported concerns about losses in culture and productivity whilst workers were more concerned about declines in social interactions, internet connectivity and increased workload. Additionally, 25% of remote-working Americans were resistant to employer mandates to return to in-office work.
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. The transition also increased the amount of time that individuals spent sitting at a workstation by up to two hours more per day, yet, most workers indicated being as productive working remotely as compared to office work before the pandemic. Supporting workers to identify effective approaches for boundary management between home and work across physical spaces, social interactions, and use of time are critical.
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. 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.
A 2024 PNAS study found that remote work dispersed economic activity away from city centers, in particular in cities with high levels of remote work.
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%).
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. 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 work from home an average of 1.5 days per week.
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.
Gallup found in February 2023 that, among remote-capable employees in the U.S., 20% worked on-site, 28% exclusively remote and 52% hybrid.
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.
A September 2022 study surveyed workers in mid-2021 and early 2022. Its 2,079 US subjects worked from home on average 1.6 days per week, similar to the global average of 1.5 days per week.
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 of 56 offices found that 51% had no policy requiring office attendance, 18% requiring two days per week, 11% requiring three days per week, and 20% had policy set at team-level.
A September 2022 study surveyed workers in mid-2021 and early 2022. Its 1,501 UK subjects worked from home on average two days per week – above the global average of 1.5 days per week.
An April 2023 survey of 558 central London workers' requirements for onsite working found the most common response was two and three days per week at 26% and 21% of responses respectively. Fewer cited one, four, and five 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.
An early 2023 survey of 2,049 workers found that 35% must work onsite for two days, 33% for three days, and 33% always work from home. In a separate question, 7% said their employer does not allow hybrid working.
A March 2023 survey of 2,016 adults found a roughly even distribution of required onsite days per week peaking at two and three days at about 16% each. However, it found a large spike in five days per week, the most common response at over 35%. About 13% were required to work fewer than one day per week.
Countering the above results suggesting a peak around 2–3 days per week, an April 2023 survey of 1,000 office workers found a peak of five days per week required onsite. Requirements for fewer days were progressively rarer, culminating in 0% saying they must work onsite less than once per month.
A May 2022 survey by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) found that 14% of working arrangements were fully remote, 24% were hybrid, and 46% were fully onsite.
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.
An Autumn Survey by ONS found that more than a quarter of working adults in Great Britain (28%) had hybrid arrangements. They found that those aged over 30, parents and managers and professionals were the most likely to log on from home.
For those able to have a hybrid arrangement, the ONS said there were significant perks, including an average of 56 minutes saved from commuting, and spending an average of 24 minutes more on sleep and rest and 15 minutes more on exercise, sports and wellbeing.
There are several key terms associated with collocated work and distributed work. The most important concepts are common ground, coupling in work, collaboration readiness, and technology readiness. This section will briefly define these four concepts.
Common ground refers to the knowledge that participants have in common, and they are aware that they have this information in common. Common ground is not just established from some general knowledge about the person's background, but also through specific knowledge learned from several different cues that are available at the moment, including the person's appearance and behavior during conversational interactions. The figure below, shows the characteristics that contribute to achieving common ground that are inherent in various communication media.
It is important to note that those who are remote complain about the difficulty of establishing common ground. This is because when individuals are connected by audio conferencing, it is difficult to tell who is speaking if you do not know the participant well. However, people with video can engage in the subtle negotiation that establishes local common ground- whether what was said was understood or not, whether the conversation can proceed or needs repair. Overall, the more common ground people can establish, the easier the communication will be and the greater the productivity.
Coupling refers to the extent and kind of communication required by the work. Tightly coupled work is work that strongly depends on the talents of collections of workers and is non-routine, and even ambiguous. Components of this type of work are highly interdependent, meaning that the work requires frequent, complex communication among group members, with short feedback loops and multiple streams of information. This type of communication is very difficult in remote locations, mostly because technology does not support rapid back and forth conversations or awareness and repair of ambiguity. On the other hand, loosely coupled work has fewer dependencies or is more routine. It is important that all group members establish common ground about the task, goals, and procedures before working, but this type of work overall requires less frequent or less complicated interactions.
Collaboration readiness is a groups willingness to work together and share their ideas. Using shared technology assumes that the coworkers need to share information and are rewarded for sharing it. It is important to note that one should not attempt to introduce groupware and remote technologies in organizations and communities that do not have a culture of sharing and collaboration.
Common ground is often used in collaboration, where a team is out to solve a complex problem. In order to solve a complex problem, the different skills and perspectives of members in a team must be pooled together. To do so, the team must make sure that they are on common ground in terms of knowledge and representation of the problem. Care must be taken to note that to achieve common ground when collaborating, differences are constructively managed, rather than downplayed. This is because collaboration differs from compromise.
Technology readiness is a company or groups willingness and ability to use technology. Companies require a technical infrastructure if they are going to adopt technologies in the company. In particular, they require the habits, including those of preparation, regular access, attention given to others’ need for information, in order to effectively use the necessary technology for distributed work. Researchers repeatedly see that failure of distributed work often results from attempts to introduce new technologies to organizations or communities that are not yet comfortable with technologies that are already in place. The following chart explains the order in which various collaboration technologies should be adopted in organizations to allow the employees to become familiar with and learn each new technology.
The list below shows the observed order in which various collaboration technologies were adopted and used in different organizations.
As this chart shows, advanced technologies should be introduced in small steps.
These key concepts are important because they help differentiate between collocated and distributed work. Later on, a fifth concept of organizational management was proposed. Organizational management is the "practices by which management activities are part of shaping the fundamental premises for collaboration without proximity"
There are two types of work that explain the geographical distance between coworkers/collaborators. Collocated work is the case in which team members are at the same location. Distributed work is the term used to explain team members who are not in the same physical location when working on a project. There are many differences, similarities, benefits, and obstacles between these two types of work. In order to distinguish between collocated and distributed work, it is necessary to go into more detail.
Collocated work is the case in which the team members are at the same physical location. This may be temporary due to travel to a common location or permanent because all collaborators of the group are at the common work site. Same location means that the coworkers can get to each other's workspaces with a short walk and communicate via face-to-face interactions. Also, during meetings or small group meetings, a major advantage of collocated work is that individuals are able to move from one meeting to another, simply by overhearing a conversation, seeing what someone is working on, and being aware of how long they had worked on it with or without progress. In addition, during these meetings, coworkers can observe someone's reaction by being able to see his/her gesture or glance. This allows for one to make sure that the group has common ground prior to moving on. Also, coworkers have access to common spaces for group interactions and have mutual access to significant shared information. In a study, researchers observed an individual describe something by drawing with his hands in the air. Later, someone referred to “that idea” by pointing to the spot in the air where the first person had "drawn his idea".
Opposite of collocated work, distributed work is the case in which team members are not physically in the same location. Thus, they are forced to use different methods of technology to communicate to make progress on the project/problem they are working on. Today, the technology distributed work groups use to communicate is constantly changing because of rapid changes and because different groups have varying access to technology. Olson & Olson (2000) describe the options of communication today which include:
Distributed work can be very successful, if the company or group displays technology readiness. Some of the benefits of distributed work include:
Distributed work is far from perfect and there are many failures, some of which include:
Overall, people who have little common ground benefit significantly from having a video channel.
Effective group communication involves various nonverbal communication characteristics. Because distance limits interpersonal interaction between members of distributed groups, these characteristics often become constrained. Communication media focuses on alternative ways to achieve these qualities and promote effective communication. This section addresses communication technology in relation to the theories of grounding and mutual knowledge and discusses the costs and benefits of various communication technology tools.
Grounding in communication is the process of updating the evolving common ground, or shared information, between participants. The base of mutual knowledge is important for effective coordination and communication. Additionally, participants constantly gather various forms of verbal and nonverbal evidence to establish understanding of change and task.
The following are means of grounding and collecting evidence:
Different forms of communication result in the varied presence of these communication characteristics. Therefore, the nature of communication technology can either promote or inhibit grounding between participants. The absence of grounding information results in reduced ability to read and understand social cues. This increases the social distance between them.
The lack of one of these characteristics generally forces participants to use alternative grounding techniques, because the costs associated with grounding change. There is often a trade-off between the costs: one cost will increase as another decreases. There is also often a correlation between the costs. The following table highlights several of the costs that can change as the medium of communication changes.
It has been argued that work can be adapted to individual situations through task decomposition and version control. This can be applied to distributed groups by allowing groups to divide the work into manageable chunks. Group members can work autonomously and come together to produce a finished product. Many recent software developments have been built to specifically address this method.
Email prevents the communication of verbal inferences, such as sarcasm and humor and, additionally, leaves email writers unaware of what their communication is lacking. When people try to anticipate the perspective of their email audience, studies suggest that they end up pulling upon their own experience and perspective instead. This often leads to inconsistencies in email conversation and chaotic communication.
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.
The UK's National Minimum Wage Act 1998 makes specific reference to home workers who "contract with a person, for the purposes of that person's business, for the execution of work to be done in a place not under the control or management of that person". In the case of James v Redcats (Brands) Ltd (2007), it was confirmed that "a home worker need not work at home, although typically he or she will do so; the only requirement is to work in a place not under the control or management of the other party".
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. Certain employee expenses, such as office expenses, can be shifted to the remote worker, although this is the subject of lawsuits.
Remote work also reduces costs for the worker such as costs of travel/commuting and clothing. It also allows for the possibility of living in a cheaper area than that of the office.
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.
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.
Remote working greatly increases the freedom employees have to choose where to work, such as a home, coffee shop or co-working space. This approach allows employees to choose their own beneficial working style in their preferred environment, further promoting a healthy work-life balance and providing productivity.
Providing the option to work remotely or adopting a hybrid work schedule has been an incentivizing benefit companies used in new hiring.
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.
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, cleaner air, and a reduction of electricity usage due to a lower office space footprint.
During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the increase in remote work led to a decrease in global CO2 emissions. 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.
The increase in remote work had also led to people moving out of cities and into larger homes which catered for home office space.
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.
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.
Remote work improves efficiency by reducing or eliminating employees commute time, thus increasing their availability to work. In addition, remote work also helps employees achieve a better work-life balance.
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. Remote work provides workers with the freedom and power to decide how and when to do their tasks and therefore can increase productivity.
Turnover intention, or the desire to leave an organization, is lower for remote workers. Remote workers who experienced greater professional isolation actually had lower turnover intention.
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 work from home two to three days per week. 26% would quit immediately or seek a new job if they were required to work five or more days per week.
A 2017 study showed that companies that offered remote work options experienced a 25% lower turnover rate.
Surveys by FlexJobs found that 81% of respondents said they would be more loyal to their employers if they had flexible work options. 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.
A 2021 employee survey reports 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 at 37%, with 52% hybrid and 11% remote.
Remote work allows employees and employers to be matched despite major location differences.
Working responsibility is given to the employee who is skilled in that area of work.
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.
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).
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. Asynchronous communication tends to be more difficult to manage and requires much greater coordination than synchronous communication. 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 oneself 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.
Face-to-face interactions increase interpersonal contact, connectedness, and trust.
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.
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.
Adaptive structuration theory studies variations in organizations as new technologies are introduced. 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). 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. 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. Remote work may alter traditional work practices, 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. The sharing of tacit information also often takes place in unplanned situations where employees follow the activities of more experienced team members.
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.
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. Feedback is particularly important so that employees continuously learn how they are performing. Electronic communication provides fewer cues for remote workers and thus, they may have more difficulties interpreting and gaining information, and subsequently, receiving feedback. When a worker is not in the office, there is limited information and greater ambiguity, such as in assignments and expectations. Role ambiguity, when situations have unclear expectations as to what the worker is to do, may result in greater conflict, frustration, and exhaustion. In other studies regarding job characteristic theory, job feedback seemed to have the strongest relationship with overall job satisfaction compared to other job characteristics. While remote working, communication is not as immediate or rich as face-to-face interactions. Less feedback when remote working is associated with lower job engagement. Thus, when perceived supervisor support and relationship quality between leaders and remote workers decreases, job satisfaction of the remote worker decreases. 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. The clarity, speed of response, richness of the communication, frequency, and quality of the feedback are often reduced when managers remote work. 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.
Social information processing suggests that individuals give meaning to job characteristics. Individuals have the ability to construct their own perception of the environment by interpreting social cues. 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. 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.
Skill variety has the strongest relationship with internal work motivation. 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, they may have lower internal motivation towards their work. Also, perceived social isolation can lead to less motivation.
Motivator-hygiene theory 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.
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.
Though working in an office has its distractions, it is often argued that remote work involves even greater distractions. 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, 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. Workers may be more distracted due to a lack of monitoring, therefore lowering productivity.
Remote working may prove consequential for workers faced with a large burden of responsibilities at home. Analyses of 2010 and 2020–21 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 working from home due to better concentration.
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 working from home more than their counterparts without children.
Intimate partner violence risk is also exacerbated for women working from home, studies of remote work during the pandemic substantiate the increased risk. Women working from home experienced a greater odds of intimate partner violence compared to those working on-site, with psychological violence being more prevalent in remote workers. The increased risk was due to factors such as social isolation, abuser access, and increased stressors of job loss and economic stress during the covid period. However, some of these factors persist in the post-covid environment. This highlights the intersection of remote work and personal safety and exposure to coercion that vulnerable women may face in a work from home environment.
Overall, the transition to remote work has amplified already existing gender disparities for women with families, where expectations that domestic responsibilities are retained, including childcare and household maintenance. The increased domestic workload burden for women is higher than men and results in increased symptoms of anxiety and depression which was not observed in women without families. While much of the literature establishing the association between psychological distress and working from home in women focuses on the effects of the COVID pandemic it is important that the psychological effects of working from home while maintainign a main domestic role are monitored in the post pandemic workplace.
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. Additionally, higher-quality relationships with teammates decreased job satisfaction of remote workers, potentially because of frustrations with exchanging interactions via technology. However, coworker support and virtual social groups for team building had a direct influence on increasing job satisfaction, 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. 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.
Working in the office with other workers could increase the potential of the worker.
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.
Skill variety, task identity, and task significance influence how much employees think their jobs are meaningful. 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. 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.
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. 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.
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.
A study by researchers at the University of Chicago showed that routine interactions with people benefits mental health.
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 to their co-workers.
Isolation due to remote work also hinders formation of friendships.
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.
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") 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.
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.
In 2021, Vermont, South Carolina, South Dakota, Alabama, and Nebraska were named as the top five safest states for remote workers based on data breaches, stolen records, privacy laws, victim count, and victim loss.
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.
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.
Additionally, remote work may not always be seen positively by management due to fear of loss of managerial control. A study found that managers had a bias against employees who did not work in the office. Managers attributed the amount of time they saw an employee in the office more than the work than the contribution that was made.
There have been conflicting data on the correlation between remote work and productivity. Some studies have found that remote work increases worker productivity and leads to higher supervisor ratings of performance and higher performance appraisals. 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. 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. However, surveys found that over two-thirds of employers reported increased productivity among remote workers.
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.
A 2008 study found that more time spent remote working decreased the perception of productivity of the remote worker by management.
The study "Remote work mindsets predict emotions and productivity in home office: a longitudinal study of knowledge workers during the Covid-19 pandemic" explores the impact of employees' mindsets on their adjustment to remote work during the pandemic. It finds that knowledge workers with a fixed mindset towards remote work experienced more negative emotions and less positive emotions, which subsequently led to perceptions of decreased productivity. Encouraging a growth mindset towards remote work, viewing it as a skill that can be developed, is suggested to improve employee experiences and productivity.
Workers who do not have remote work privileges may be envious of those who do, leading to workplace controversies.
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.
Tax implications of working remotely in a different jurisdiction than the employer are often not fully understood by remote workers.
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. 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.
In the future, design improvements and more horsepower will solve a number of current problems that currently cause limitations of distance technologies. Greater bandwidth will solve the disruptive influence of today's delays in audio and video transmission. This will also allow for larger, smoother, more life-size displays of remote workers, making their interaction more similar to the flow of face-to-face interactions. In the future, it is possible that technology will provide capabilities that are in some ways superior to face-to-face options. However, it is likely that problems will result from distributed work technologies and from a lack of knowledge to operate the technologies in the future and face-to-face interactions will not be able to be eliminated.