The COVID-19 pandemic has led to considerable shifts in job patterns and methods. Working from home (WFH) is one of the substantial shifts occurring due to the pandemic, in which some employers keep this work pattern even after the pandemic has ended. While some people prefer to work from the office, others find it more beneficial to work from home. By taking workers’ perspective, this post argues that WFH might be considered a positive change that should be kept for the long-run work pattern whenever possible.
To begin, it is worth identifying factors that drive firms to keep implementing WFH. In their study, Barrero et al. (2023) suggest that computer-intensive, analytically-oriented jobs in urban centers encourage workers to work from home to avoid commuting, saving their time and increasing their productivity. Moreover, infrastructure such as a high-quality internet network, enough space for a home office, and advanced managerial practices around performance assessment and monitoring are other driving forces to keep working from home. From the demographic aspect, WFH intensity is positively associated with the education level of individual workers, young and adult individuals, and the presence of children at home.
Next, why should we consider keeping the work-from-home culture whenever possible? From the point of view of individual workers, WFH could increase productivity and efficiency by reducing the monetary and time costs needed to commute to the workplace. For example, Gibbs et al. (2023) found that the savings in commute time significantly overcome the additional 1.5 hours each day that employees put into their jobs after fully remote working. Therefore, they could individually manage their time allocation efficiently to work and fulfill their tasks on time, assuming they have a time-discipline manner, and save some portion of income initially taken for commuting. Moreover, existing studies reveal that working from home some days a week not only enhances productivity but also leads to happier employees (Choudhury et al., 2022; Bloom et al., 2023), linking productivity gains with higher effort levels of happier employees, quieter work environments at home, and the time savings that employees place back into their jobs.
On the other hand, it should be acknowledged that there are concerns related to working remotely. Barrero et al. (2023) explain that the first concern relates to motivation and self-control, as working from the office might act as a commitment device to work under the supervision of the employer. Hybrid working arrangements might be an alternative to address this concern since they enable in-person meetings and simultaneously allow monitoring and coordination. Moreover, working at the office sometimes does not warrant that workers will be productive all day as some distractions might occur. The second issue concerns the possibility that shifting to WFH could slow innovations down by undermining the idea-generating capabilities. However, recent technological developments have supported WFH with higher quality virtual communications, such as the internet, better broadband infrastructure, video teleconference, cloud storage, and better software tools for remote collaboration.
It is imperative to note that working from home (WFH) might not be possible for all types of jobs. For example, in front-line retail, the tourism industry (whether skilled or semi-skilled), transportation, construction, manufacturing, hospitality, and janitorial and cleaning services often require on-site presence, given that these entail face-to-face interactions with customers or colleagues and completion of tasks using specialized equipment (Barrero et al., 2023). In principle, the suitability of a job for remote work varies significantly along a spectrum (Barrero et al., 2023). Tasks that are inherently unsuitable for remote work cluster at one end, while those conducive to remote arrangements cluster at the other. If the tasks associated with a job predominantly fall on the less-suitable end, remote work is less likely to be adopted, and vice versa. Additionally, adopting remote work is influenced by evolving perceptions of productivity in a WFH setting, the quality of available remote work tools, and an organization’s ability to effectively manage remote employees.
To conclude, working from home or hybrid working could be prospective mechanisms of working for several types of jobs in the future. They offer benefits from increasing productivity and time efficiency of workers. While they might not be possible for occupations requiring physical presence at the workplace, working from home or hybrid working could be a beneficial option for other jobs that could be done remotely.
References
Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2023). The evolution of work from home. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 37(4), 23-49.
Bloom, N., Han, R., & Liang, J. (2022). How hybrid working from home works out (No. w30292). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Choudhury, P., Khanna, T., Makridis, C. A., & Schirmann, K. (2024). Is hybrid work the best of both worlds? Evidence from a field experiment. Review of Economics and Statistics, 1-24.
Gibbs, M., Mengel, F., & Siemroth, C. (2023). Work from home and productivity: Evidence from personnel and analytics data on information technology professionals. Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, 1(1), 7-41.
hope. 