CONTENTS

• Introduction
• What is telework?
• What is an alternate worksite?
• Where did telework come from (history)?
• Benefits vs drivers
• New directions
• Research and research issues
• The target organization
• Telework challenges
• What's involved in setting up a telework program?
• Final comments
• Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

In some ways, setting up a successful telework program is like painting your house: much of the success is rooted in the preparation. If you prepare well, teleworking implementation will be easy. One of the main steps in adequate preparation is getting educated.

Knowing what you are doing before beginning a project is common sense. For telework implementation, however, it is critical:

• Telework is not a one-size fits all proposition; nor is it a concrete set of standard operating procedures. There are many types of telework arrangements and programs and ways to implement them. Moreover, telework is a growth concept; we are constantly refining it as we use it and as we learn more about how it works.
• Telework programs are multi-faceted in their impact and operation in any given organization. Telework implementation affects individual workers, their co-workers, their organizations and their customers. We have found that it is very important to tailor telework programs to the organization’s individual workers, needs, mission, culture, circumstances, and customers.
• Despite the fact that telework has been around for a while, telework implementation is still associated with organizational culture change. Changes in organizational culture, no matter how beneficial, can be very fragile and difficult at the beginning. Telework program implementers will usually need to draw on a solid understanding of both telework and the organization to make them fit well enough to overcome initial jitters.
• Common perceptions of telework are usually shrouded in misinformation and anxious anticipation. Much of the initial implementation work, therefore, will be devoted to communicating/teaching what telework is and correcting erroneous beliefs.
• Finally, there are well-known "what if" questions to telework implementers. Typically, nervous, inquisitive, and/or resistant customers barrage telework implementers with ‘what if’ scenarios reaching unimaginable topics. The wise implementer will be prepared to handle most of these. The unprepared implementer will not be able to handle these and will magnify existing discomfort as well as implementation difficulty.

It's clear that getting educated about telework and the target organization should be a key initial activity for telework implementation.

The focus of this session will be educating you about getting educated. We will discuss issues, topic areas, sample content, and ways to get educated. This session is your guide to getting educated. YOUR HOMEWORK IS TO GET EDUCATED. There are numerous books, newsletters, websites, organization reports, consultants, other experts, and other sources on telework to provide you with a broad overview of telework.

Let’s begin this guide to getting educated with a basic question:

WHAT IS TELEWORK?

It would be nice, for starters, to have a single simple definition of telework. Sorry about that! To date, there is no clear consensus on a precise definition of telework. There is however, a common general theme to all of the telework definitions: telework refers to remote working of some sort (working at an alternate worksite that is away from the main or primary worksite typically used by the organization). As you will begin to see, this latter general definition is not nearly precise enough. It lacks parameters that specify such important factors as frequency, location, conditions and/or type of work, definition of alternate worksite, etc. Except, perhaps, for researchers and linguists, however, this should not be a major problem, especially when you consider the importance of tailoring the telework definition to the goals and objectives of your organization.

For example, consider the following definition driven by the goals and objectives of the user:

Telework is a work arrangement in which employees work at alternate worksites to conduct some or all of their officially assigned work during paid work hours provided that

1. Working at the alternate worksite reduces the time and/or distance associated with the employees commute to the main worksite and;
2. The employee teleworks, on average, at least eight work hours every two weeks.

This definition’s emphasis on regular use and reduced commutes can be associated with goals such as achieving a family friendly and environmentally responsible workplace. Under this definition, an individual who works at home in the evening after working at the main worksite during normal business hours is NOT a teleworker (i.e. does not reduce the commute and may not qualify as paid work hours).

Commute-related definitions such as the one above are common among traditional telework definitions and are still associated with purist telework advocates.

At the other end of the spectrum, are definitions from a newer school of thought that favors a broader view of telework. An example of such a definition is:

Telework is a work arrangement in which employees work at any time or place that allows them to accomplish their work in an effective and efficient manner.

Telework is part of a general trend toward progress in the workplace. As we move further from the Industrial Age and into the Information Age, the nature of work, as well as the workplace, is changing. Telework is an Information Age phenomenon growing out of information-based work as well as the rapid advance of technology. There is no doubt that relatively recent capabilities (computers, e-mail, voice mail, Internet, etc.) have helped open the door for telework. But it should be noted that worker values are changing as well. Today, there is a new emphasis on family friendly workplaces, health, and general well being. These values have motivated workers to seek out work arrangements such as telework.

WHAT IS AN ALTERNATE WORKSITE?

As mentioned above, the alternate worksite is the location away from the organization’s main worksite where the employ teleworks. The most commonly used alternate worksite is the employee’s residence. Other commonly used alternate worksites include telework centers, satellite offices, hotel rooms, airplanes, trains, and automobiles. To an extent, the definition of an alternate worksite depends on the telework definition. Thus, alternate worksites can range from designated work locations that reduce employee commutes to ‘anywhere’ away from the main worksite.

Telework Centers and Satellite Offices

A telework center is an alternate worksite that contains workstations that are leased by a variety of employers for the use of teleworkers in their organizations. Generally, telework centers are set up in ‘geographically convenient’ locations. For example, some telecenters are located in suburban, exurban, or rural areas and are designed to accommodate nearby residents desiring to avoid commutes to their main worksites in urban centers. Telework centers have been established by cooperative ventures or partnerships, private sector organizations, and by public sector agencies.

Satellite offices are typically auxiliary worksites set up and used by a single employer. Satellite offices are not necessarily geographically convenient or designed specifically for telework use.

Whether or not a satellite office qualifies as an alternate worksite in telework terms depends on the definition of telework being used. For example, in the traditional commute-related definition, satellite offices would only qualify as telework alternate worksites in situations where use of the satellite office reduces the commute of its users.

Finally, the educated implementer must be aware of the variety of synonyms that have been used in place of the term telework: telecommuting, flexiplace, remote work, mobile work, home-based business, etc. Regarding these terms, there have been impassioned debates among telework experts regarding the proper terminology and associated definitions. No effort will be made to resolve terminology issues here. The point to be made is that implementers must be aware that while such terms and controversy exist, the relevant terminology and its meaning will, again, depend on the goals and objectives of the organization’s telework program.

WHERE DID TELEWORK COME FROM? WHAT IS ITS HISTORY?

A focused implementer may ask, "Why do I need to know the history of telework when I am only interested in implementing a telework program in the here and now?" That is a good question, and the answer is that, as mentioned earlier, one of the important initial activities for telework implementers is dispelling misinformation and inspiring confidence in the initiative. One of the primary pieces of misinformation is that telework is a new and untested program. It behooves the implementer, therefore, to be able to point out the historical grounding of telework as well as the strength and diversity of its roots.

The following is a brief historical chronology of telework that should serve most purposes:

(NOTE: The following is only a sampling and there are bound to be significant events that are not included. We welcome suggestions for additional significant events.)

• 1972: After teleworking from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C. in the early 1960's while working as a consulting rocket scientist to the U.S. Air Force Space Program, Jack Nilles became a University of Southern California researcher focusing on the telecommunications-transportation tradeoff. This was the path that Jack Nilles would follow to become known as "The Father of Telecommuting/Telework."

• 1973: Jack Nilles directed the first telework demonstration project. The project (conducted with 30 employees in a private sector organization) was partially funded by the National Science Foundation. It was here that Nilles coined both the words "telecommuting" and "teleworking." He went on to become one of the earliest implementers of telework programs, write several books on the subject, and provide telework consultation on a worldwide basis.

• 1979: Frank Schiff, Vice President and Chief Economist of the Committee for Economic Development, coined the term ‘flexiplace’ and published one of the first major media telework articles in the Washington Post ("Working At Home Can Save Gasoline").

• 1980: One of the first known telecenters was established in Marne-la-Valle, France. The second in Nykvarn, Sweden (1982), and the third in Benglen, Switzerland (1985). The telecottage concept is said to have originated in Scandinavia in 1985. There are now scores or hundreds of them worldwide.

• 1980's: Spurred by the work of Jack Nilles, Gil Gordon, and others, a variety of private sector and public sector organizations began implementing pilot tests of telecommuting programs. For example, in 1981, JC Penney started its first group of home-based call center agents to take catalog orders, thus marking the first use of telecommuting for inbound call centers.

• 1980's: Spurred by the work of Frank Schiff, a scattering of Federal agencies (GSA, NIH, EPA, Air Force, Army, Labor, Railroad Retirement Board, NASA, IRS) implemented small scale experiments and/or studies on telework.

• 1982: Gil Gordon (Gil Gordon Associates) hosted the first national conference on telecommuting in the U.S.

• 1984: Gil Gordon (Gil Gordon Associates) established the first nationally recognized newsletter on telework issues.

• 1985: Southern California Association of Governments transportation planner Patricia Mokhtarian established the predecessor organization to the International Telework Association and Council (ITAC), first as the Telecommuting Subcommittee of the Telecommunications Task Force of the Los Angeles Central City Association, and then, in 1988, renamed the Telecommuting Advisory Council.

• 1987: Based on research, planning, and design work by David Fleming, California state government official, and Jack Nilles, the State of California launched the first comprehensive public-sector telecommuting pilot program.

• 1989: The President’s Council on Management Improvement commissioned the first ‘government-wide’ telework pilot project for Federal agencies.

• 1990's: Led by a small but growing number of congressional leaders, such as Rep. Frank Wolfe (Virginia) and Rep. Steny Hoyer (Maryland), the U.S. Congress became a committed and nonpartisan ally of telework.

• 1992: The European Community Telework Forum was organized with Jack Nilles as the keynote speaker at its first conference in Den Helder, the Netherlands.

• 1992: The California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) and the US Federal Highway Administration funded the Neighborhood Telecenters Project (conducted by Pat Mokhtarian at the University of California, Davis) which opened 15 telecenters in California, and monitored/evaluated others across the state. By 1997, nearly 40 demonstration telecenters had been opened in California alone. Due to the difficulties associated with sustaining telecenters, many of these telecenters are now closed.

• 1992: Marsha Fuller, a consultant from Hagerstown, Maryland, engineered the foundation for the initial Federal government directed telecenters. Based on this work, the US Congress, led by Reps. Wolfe and Hoyer funded the Interagency Telecommuting Pilot Project, directed by Warren Master of the US General Services Administration (GSA). This project, which continues with congressional support, was established to pilot the use of telecenters in Federal agencies and is located in the Washington, DC metropolitan area.

• 1993: The US Office of Personnel Management officially endorsed use of telework by Federal agencies.

• 1993: The US Department of Transportation, led by project manager Ed Weiner, published the first major Federal report on transportation implications of telework (the ‘red’ book).

• Mid 1990's: Based on progress with the Interagency Pilot Project, GSA established emergency Federal telecenters in response to the Northridge earthquake in California, the Oklahoma city bombing and the Atlanta Olympics. Despite being built with continuation in mind, the emergency California and Oklahoma centers succumbed to the same problems that closed the previously mentioned CALTRANS centers.

• 1994: AT&T held the first corporate nationwide Employee Telecommuting Day to spread the word to employees about utilizing and benefiting from telework

• 1995: Based on its success with its Employee Telecommuting Day led by Susan Sears, AT&T Telework Director, AT&T helped to establish a national public awareness and education program called Telecommute America (now known as Telework America). The US Environmental Protection Agency, the US General Services Administration, US Department of Transportation, US Department of Commerce and the Association for Commuter Transportation joined AT&T to become the initial founding sponsors of this nationwide program.

• Mid 1990's: Private sector corporations begin reporting substantial savings in facility operating costs through use of telework.

• 1996: The President’s Management Council implemented the National Telecommuting Initiative (now called National Telework Initiative -NTI) led by the US Department of Transportation (DOT) and US General Services Administration (GSA). The mission of the NTI was to boost use of telework by all American employers (public and private sectors) with special emphasis on Federal agencies.

• 1997: ITAC announced that more than 11 million people reported working as telecommuters in 1997, compared to eight million in 1995, according to survey findings from the 1997 American Internet User Survey, commissioned by FIND/SVP, a New York-based market research and advisory company. The survey found increased company and employee awareness of the benefits of telecommuting, a robust U.S. economy and increased and more efficient use of technology -- particularly the Internet -- to be the main reasons for the growth.

• 1997: DOT hosted the first International Workshop on Planning Regional Telework programs (Irvine, California)

• 1998: Key trends include a growing interest abroad in telework, with the largest push in Western Europe; employers are reporting an improved ability to recruit and retain talented workers using telework in an increasingly competitive labor market; DOT and GSA continue to lead the Federal Government’s telework efforts; and the International Telework Association & Council/Telework America continue to lead the nation’s overall telework educational and implementation efforts.

WHAT’S WITH TELECENTERS IN THE U.S.?

Telecenter users make up a small proportion of the total population of US teleworkers. Despite their smaller impact, telecenters (see alternate worksites section) have always been part of the telework landscape. In fact, expectations of telecenters have been, perhaps, more dramatic than any other aspect of telework. At one time or another, it was envisioned that telecenters could play many roles including:

• bringing government to the people
• filling the preference gap for those workers wanting to avoid long commutes but not wanting or unable to work at home
• revitalizing rural and/or economically blighted areas
• making customer services more convenient for a wide variety of customer groups
• linking home-based teleworkers to convenient administrative support
• helping organizations reduce their facility operating costs
• serving as emergency worksites
• playing a major role in linking the information highway to under-served citizens
• providing community services

Thus far, telecenters have fallen far short of these expectations. Before discussing the problem, however, let’s look at what has been done. First of all, we should note that telecenters are significant components of telework programs in countries other than the U.S. The role, expectations, and success of telecenters vary depending on the country.

In the U.S., telecenters have played a role in:

• providing workstations for nearby residents enabling them to avoid long commutes
• providing government services such as training and counseling to nearby communities
• providing emergency workstations for workers affected by disasters
• providing information highway access such as distance learning

So, what’s the problem? Why have telecenters fallen short of expectations? First, let’s define the problem. Telecenters have performed very well on the program side of things. That is, they have lived up to the typical benefits (morale, job performance, reduced commutes, etc.) associated with telework. Furthermore, most customer organizations have been satisfied with telecenter offerings.

However, in many cases, telecenters have not performed well on the business side of the ledger. Most have not been able to become financially viable. Typically, telecenters have been set up based on a subsidy or other investment. Because of the relative newness of telework and the fact that its still a difficult sell to organizations, the centers begin operations by offering subsidized, below market rates for their services. This was done, obviously, to lure customers. Once the subsidy runs out and the telecenter attempts to charge higher rates, the customers leave and the telecenters close. This is because telecenters face obstacles beyond the normal telework issues (see challenges to telework section) of newness and/or organizational resistance to change.

Currently, in order to use telecenters, most organizations will pay increased overhead for every telecenter user as well as for the existing user’s workstation at the organization’s main worksite. In effect, the organization will be paying for empty workstations, which is obviously not a wise business habit.

When telecenter charges are low, many organizations will overlook this overhead waste. When telecenter charges approach market rates, their use becomes out of the question. Ironically, this is exacerbated by the fact that once customers become accustomed to low rates, it is difficult to increase the rates. Moreover, organizations that begin to adopt home-based telework, which is generally less expensive, they question whether they need telecenters.

In a sense, the timing of the evolution of telecenters is slightly unlucky. As you will read later, telecenters will greatly benefit from the advance of another movement: alternative officing. In fact, successful incorporation of alternative officing is critical to the survival of telecenters. Finally, once there is surer financial footing, other telecenter business problems such as pricing effectively and providing revenue-generating service offerings (other than workstations) can be easily addressed.

BENEFITS VS DRIVERS

Two important questions that are frequently asked are:

1. Why do it? What benefits can be expected?
2. What’s driving telework? Why is it evolving? Why are folks doing it?

While these questions appear to focus on the same thing, there is a subtle difference between drivers and benefits, and while there is some overlap between the two concepts, their difference is important.

This is more than just a philosophical discussion. We have noted that implementers sometimes confuse drivers and benefits. This leads to confusion and improper expectations from their organizations and customers as well as errors in planning, program promotion, and other implementation activities. It is important for implementers to know the drivers and benefits associated with telework as well as the relationship between the two concepts.

Finally, as will be constantly mentioned in this session, drivers, benefits, and other aspects of telework are highly situational. They are relative to and/or tailored to the organization and its particular circumstances. Drivers and benefits can vary from organization to organization and/or from location to location. Drivers and benefits also vary according to the targets of their impact, which can range from the telework movement as a whole down to individual workers and organizations.

The difference between drivers and benefits begins with their timing. The impact of telework drivers precedes program implementation whereas the impact of benefits results from implementation. For example, the transition from Industrial Age working to Information Age working is a driver of telework programs (occurs prior to and led to evolution of telework). Improved employee morale is a benefit (occurs after and results from implementation of telework). Clearly, there is an overlap. The need for and expectations of certain benefits, especially when such benefits have been shown to be common results of telework, can also be drivers. Recently, the increased need to be more competitive in recruiting and retaining high tech workers has become a driver for telework because the benefit of improved quality of worklife has been highly touted by teleworkers.

The point is to know what you are talking about when asked. Typically, researchers, policy makers, and vendors/investors in telework products, services, and activities are highly interested in drivers. They want to know what is going to make telework happen and make assessments of the drivers. On the other hand, managers, human resources personnel, unions, and workers are interested in the benefits. They want to know what they can expect to get out of telework. Implementers will need to respond effectively and accurately to both audiences.

Below are sample lists of drivers and benefits.

Telework Drivers:

• The transition from Industrial Age working to Information Age working
• Advances in technology
• Sociological trends: Increases in dual wage earner and single parent families, along with increased pressures to balance work and family life
• Changing worker values leading to more emphasis on balance between work and personal life as well as reduced stress
• Social and political pressures for environmental conservation
• Organizational pressures to be more competitive, to reduce operating costs, and to improve ability to recruit and retain workers

  Telework Benefits:

• Improved quality of worklife: morale, stress, personal control, work/family/personal life balance, commute pressures
• Improved job performance: individual, organizational
• Improved ability to recruit and retain workers
• Environmental conservation
• Improve organizational cost efficiency: facility, health care, and other operating costs
• Improved management of human resources
• Improved customer service

It's clear that responses to questions like ‘Why have people done it or why do people do it?’ (drivers) vs. ‘Why should we do it?’ (benefits) can be entirely different.

CATEGORIZATION OF TELEWORK BENEFITS

Over the years, there has been a common practice to categorize telework benefits according to their purported beneficiaries. Typical categories are workers, organizations, and communities. For example, quality of worklife was categorized as a ‘worker’ benefit; job performance as an ‘organizational’ or ‘management’ benefit; and environmental conservation as a ‘community’ benefit. I am not wholly sure why we got into this habit, perhaps as a convenience for communicating information to audiences with perceived limited interests. At any rate, such categorizing makes little sense and appears to avoid the challenge of communicating the true value of telework. Clearly, we all benefit and should be interested in improvements in quality of worklife, job performance and the environment. Cordoning off benefits to avoid conflicts with, or pander to, tough audiences such as management personnel serves us no benefit in the long run.

NEW DIRECTIONS

As is periodically the case in most movements, there are currently some new directions in the telework movement. In general, it appears that the scope of telework activity and benefits is broadening.

To begin, telework is embracing the alternative officing/ facility reconfiguration (AO) movement. Briefly, the AO movement is an effort by organizations to reduce their facility operating costs by redesigning furniture and facilities, workstation occupancy, and organizational locations to reduce the amount of expensive real estate in their portfolios. AO uses occupancy arrangements such as hoteling and shared workstations. Telework can reduce the utilization of "downtown" organizational office space as well as organizational office space in general. This greatly facilitates the achievement of AO goals. Likewise, because alternative officing takes advantage of workstations vacated by teleworkers, it removes the excessive overhead problem that sorely affects telecenter survival. In fact, the combination of alternative officing along with other types of telework, including the use of telecenters, can improve the organization’s bottom line (as opposed to the negative impact created by telecenter use in the absence of AO).

Another expansion of telework focuses on "work anywhere, anytime." New telework philosophy focuses on ‘how’ one works not just ‘where’ one works. While telework originally focused primarily on work at home and/or at telecenters, work anywhere strategies focus on atypical worksites such as automobiles, trains, planes, hotel rooms, and yes, even beaches. Aspects of work anywhere were formerly limited to mobile workers such as investigators and auditors who work at or near the locations of their targets, wherever that might be. As organizational cultures have grown more used to telework, the need to limit teleworkers to their homes or nearby telecenters has diminished.

Likewise, the need to limit telework to business hours and/or a range covering a few hours on either end of the typical business day has diminished. Some telework organizations are trying ‘work anytime’ arrangements. Such arrangements can involve work time shifting that can cover an eight-hour day, one or more days a week. Limited versions of work anytime have been around for a while and known as flexitime, maxi-flex, or alternative work schedules. Thus, some organizations are moving telework from a flexible workplace arrangement to a totally flexible work arrangement.

Finally, there have been some new partnerships and/or combined programs between telework programs and other "tele" programs such as tele-medicine, distance learning, and other tele service activities. Based on common remote operating principles and philosophies, such programs can coexist and reinforce each other’s mission. For example, the National Guard Bureau (NGB) has recently funded a major new distance learning effort. This effort involves remodeling guard armories into high tech distance learning centers. Since guard activities are scheduled for evenings and weekends, this leaves these high tech armories free during prime business hours. The NGB has, therefore, established partnerships with telecenter vendors to use the armories as telecenters during business hours.

RESEARCH AND RESEARCH ISSUES

When it comes to telework, research issues abound. There is, of course, the normal focus on program evaluation and research associated with the introduction of any new program. In addition, however, there are research issues that arise out of the barrage of "what if" scenarios. There is the current popular preoccupation with ‘measurement’ and so-called ‘hard data’. There is also the interesting tendency for organizations to request research information on aspects of telework, such as productivity or cost effectiveness, data that many don't have for traditional work arrangements. Finally, professionals from other disciplines such as accounting, real estate or telecommunications who interface with the telework programs will bring expectations of numerical analysis from their fields to the far less concrete area of telework and human resources management.

Interestingly, telework research over the years has shown consistency in measurements that extend across public and private sector organizations as well as global boundaries. This ‘sameness’ of findings gives validation and reliability to telework data and assessments. It also means that telework researchers need not constantly plow over the same issues.

Following is a sample of telework research highlights. More details on research, assessments, evaluations, research strategies, etc. are covered in future workshops in this series.

• Growth of telework: While there has been a lot of controversy over definitions of telework and the precise number of teleworkers, it is clear that the number of teleworkers has been growing consistently over the past two decades.

• Job Performance/Productivity: While there is measurement controversy over this topic, a conservative summary is that job performance and/or productivity are undiminished by telework. Many programs report gains in both job performance (quantity, quality, timeliness) as well as productivity.

Job Performance vs. Productivity: Know Your Terms

One of the most common questions of telework implementers is, "How does telework affect productivity?" Technically, the term productivity, in this arena, refers to the ratio of work output to input. There are different ways to measure both output and input and, typically, time/motion or similar studies have measured productivity. In the white-collar world of work, productivity studies are costly, resource-intensive, difficult and highly questionable in application. In fact, except for production-oriented jobs such as claims examiners, true studies of productivity at the white-collar organizational level are rarely attempted.

When the productivity question comes up, most of the time, the inquirers are using the term loosely to refer to job performance in general. Typically, this type of job performance measurement (quantity, quality, timeliness, etc.) is based on supervisor judgements (and sometimes self-assessments) of worker performance. Studies of such measures are abundantly available. Of course, one must realize that such assessments may be biased by various and sundry manager, worker, and other extraneous factors.

Bottom Line: The implementer should be aware of this productivity terminology issue. Most of the time, the implementer can respond to questions on productivity by providing information from studies of manager judgements of performance.

• Quality of Worklife: This covers issues such as family friendliness of the work place, morale, balance of personal and worklife, ability to concentrate, work environment, privacy, comfort, etc. Findings here are generally off the scale in favor of telework. Most teleworkers report substantial and continuing improvements in their quality of worklife when introduced to telework.

• Management Reaction: Most studies show that managers respond favorably to telework once they have implemented the program and grown accustomed to it.

• Operational Costs: Issues similar to those for productivity assessments impede true cost-benefit analysis of telework programs. While there have been few comprehensive cost benefit analyses reported, there have been reports based on individual or selected factors such as facility costs. In fact, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting organizations are realizing substantial savings via use of telework and alternative officing arrangements (see alternative officing section).

• Health, Stress, Sick Leave: Findings consistently show that teleworkers are enjoying improved levels of health, stress, and reduced use of sick leave.

• Environmental Impact: This area focuses on traffic congestion, air quality, and energy utilization. Since the number of teleworkers in a given community are not large or concentrated enough, most of the work here consists of projections. These projections show promising but limited and/or minimal environmental impact at this time. Until concentrated community efforts lead to substantial adoption of telework by a significant number of local employers, environmental benefits will be limited.

• Grievances/Workers’ Compensation Claims: According to reports from sources such as telework organizations, the U.S. Department of Labor, grievances and/or Workers’ Compensation Claims associated with telework programs have been negligible.

• Recruiting and Retention: This is a hot, new benefit recently attributed to telework. There has been a lot of positive anecdotal reporting on this and empirical reports are just beginning to emerge, but according to a report from the big eight accounting firms, such firms have experienced improved ability to recruit and retain valued workers through use of programs such as telework.

THE TARGET ORGANIZATION

Thus far, we have focused on getting educated about telework. But recall the primary advice given about tailoring telework to the organization. Just as it is important to have a solid understanding of telework, it is likewise important to have a solid understanding of the organization in which you plan to implement telework.

If you have worked in or with the target organization for a while, you probably think you know all you need to know about it. However, the following are some organizational considerations for your education.

From the telework implementer’s perspective, the target organization can be known in terms of the following components:

• Workers
• Managers
• Unions
• Organization (collective)
• Customers
• The Work

Following are examples of helpful knowledge about target organizations. More details, including assessments associated with gaining such knowledge will be covered in subsequent months.

• Individual workers: The nature of individual worker characteristics such as occupational needs; interpersonal relationships and communications; psychological, social, and physical health status; perceived and real status and rank; workplace privacy; sense of control over one’s immediate environment; quality of worklife (morale, level of energy, commitment, job flexibility, ability to concentrate, family-friendliness, job satisfaction); promotion potential; workplace comfort; teamwork and collaboration; work-related values; etc.

• Management: In addition to individual worker considerations (managers are workers), the nature of manager issues include human resource management; recruitment/retention, management style; expectations of workers; communications; collaboration; values; etc.

• Unions: Union considerations include the nature of labor management relations; on-going issues; activity level of the union; preferred level of involvement in implementation issues; union concerns about telework; etc.

• Organization: Organizational considerations focus on overarching issues affecting the total organization, above and beyond individual workers. For example, the organizational culture; organizational functioning (such as collaboration and/or teamwork); union issues; organizational structure; mission; strategic plan; cross organization communication and collaboration; values; legal and policy issues; etc.

A Note about Organizational Culture

In discussing strategies for telework implementation, it is important to consider the role of organizational culture. Organizational culture is an often loosely used concept that covers an extremely broad array of things. For this discussion, we are referring generally to organizational characteristics such as shared work values; formal and informal practices, policies, ideas, and expectations involved in an organized workplace; ways of communicating and relating; ways of getting work done; and so on. For example, organizational culture issues might focus on issues such as:

• Is this a participatory organization in which workers at all levels participate in policy development?
• Is the individual or the team more important?
• Are results more important than policies or rules?  

• Customers: Customer considerations focus on requirements; expectations; satisfaction; communications; comfort; etc.

• The Work applies to individual and organizational level considerations including job performance: quantity, quality, timeliness; work habits: availability, staying up-to-date, participation in work activities, work-related disposition; teamwork and collaboration; effectiveness and efficiency of work-related communications; productivity; effectiveness and efficiency of work-related interpersonal relationships; customer service

TELEWORK CHALLENGES:
WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES FACING TELEWORK?
WHAT OBSTACLES CAN AN IMPLEMENTER EXPECT?

As mentioned in the discussion on research, telework benefits from consistency in program findings. One of the most consistent findings is that the number one challenge to telework acceptance and implementation, both in general and at the individual organization level, is overcoming management resistance.

Telework runs counter to the prevailing industrial-based management culture. There has been a wide variety of assessed descriptions of management reaction to telework: control issues, anxiety issues, incompatible work, untrustworthy employees, face-to-face style, loss of teamwork or spontaneous interpersonal working, costs, etc.

The common denominator, however, is probably the most difficult adjustment to change, especially when change affects ingrained attitudes and habits. More detailed discussions of this as well as strategies will be presented in the next few workshop sessions over the coming months.

The main challenge aside, there are others that merit mention. Implementers can expect Local Area Network (LAN) managers and other technical support personnel to be concerned about increased workloads and increased vulnerability of their systems. Unions will be concerned about their ability to represent their members, memories of sweatshop situations, fairness in implementation, their role in implementing telework (planning, designing, and monitoring). Budget officials will be concerned about the costs involved in implementing telework arrangements.

In the past, telework advocates have emphasized management resistance and managers as the main stumbling block. While this is still accurate, the expansion of telework to more employees in the organization and to alternative officing has produced a new resistor: the employees. It seems that employees have their own resistance to change when it comes to giving up their traditional permanent workstations, sharing workstations, and/or learning to operate new technology/software associated with remote access, etc. While the employee challenge is not quite as difficult as the management challenge, it is nonetheless growing to be another challenge for implementers.

WHAT’S INVOLVED IN SETTING UP A TELEWORK PROGRAM?

To an extent, the strategy for setting up a telework program will depend on organizational and implementer characteristics, preferences and circumstances. Therefore, we are not advocating a single simple recipe for doing this. Instead, listed below, are typical aspects for telework setup that should be considered by the implementer. This is not an exhaustive list and the implementer will need to determine what else may be needed. Fortunately, this will be covered in far more detail in the coming workshops. For now, this is provided to give the implementer a general initial perspective.

• Develop a decision-maker consensus of expectations from the program. Why is the organization interested in implementing telework?

• Obtain top level support and agreement that the telework program will be more than lip service.

• Obtain stakeholder support (unions, support staff, management groups, LAN managers, technical support staff, etc.). Carry out negotiations or consultations, as needed, with stakeholder groups.

• Put together a planning team that is most advantageous to the target organization. For optimal support and ease of implementation, who needs to be involved in planning?

• Develop operating strategy and policy for the program. What are the parameters of the program? Who will be in it? How will it work?

• Develop implementation and change management plans. What is the schedule for implementation? How will it be implemented? How will the change (transition) be managed?

• Develop orientation/training for the program. What new knowledge is needed? Who needs it? How will it be communicated?

• Develop policy instruments such as work agreements between the organization, manager, and/or worker.

• Establish mechanisms for coordinating, supporting, and troubleshooting the program once it is underway. Ensure adequate technical and policy support for participants.

• Establish and implement program awareness, promotion, and acceptance plan. Inform the organization why this is being done and how it will benefit them and the organization, in general; dispel misinformation and anxiety.

• Establish and implement monitoring and evaluation to ensure that the program goals are being met.

FINAL COMMENT ON GETTING EDUCATED

Now you are ready to realize and additional benefit of getting educated for telework implementation. Clearly, there can be a lot involved in starting a successful program and, because of that, many of you will seek help. There is a lot of free help available from veteran telework programs and organizations (such as ITAC). These organizations will provide both advice and materials.

However, you may need more than that; you may need more assistance in planning, designing and implementing your telework program. There are numerous, capable consultants and service vendors that can help. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE ASSISTANCE IS FREE OR PURCHASED, YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND WHAT YOU ARE GETTING in order to avoid wasting time and resources.

CONCLUSION

Now you have an idea about what you need in terms of education for telework implementation. We strongly recommend:

1. That you complete, as much as possible, your preliminary education on the issues presented here. Plan to do this in a timely fashion so that you will be ready to …
2. Continue with the on-line Telework America workshop series throughout the "Year of Telework", November, 1998 - October, 1999.

Revisit this session as often as needed.