LinkedIn Dialog
Traffic Congestion

Vancouver gridlock costs commuters 87 hours a year - what are the pros and cons to remote working?

Burgess COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

Image of author Alison Azaria | 2degrees | Discussion | 5 June Vancouver gridlock costs commuters 87 hours a year - what are the pros and cons to remote working? Vancouver gridlock costs commuters 87 hours a year Would remote working or, working from home soon be adopted as the 'corporate norm'? On top of the GHG and energy scarcity issues, it's really stressful to be stuck in traffic for hours. What are the pros and cons to working remotely? When is it benefitial for someone to work remotely and in the office? Are companies already taking this into account in their sustainability agenda?

Giles Liddell | Bristol City Council | 6 June Re: Vancouver gridlock costs commuters 87 hours a year - what are the pros and cons to remote working? Hi Alison, I would say that there are a number of strands to this:

Emissions: the recent Carbon Trust report concludes that there are savings to be had, but it depends on whether the extra emissions from heating and lighting many homes over one large office outweights the transport emissions from travelling to work. It is summarised nicely here: http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/analysis/2345805/will-flexible-working-really-shrink-your-carbon-footprint

Productivity: It is interesting that an internet company (Yahoo) and a telepresence provider (HP) have both reduced homeworking for similar reasons. Marissa Mayer summarised it best when she said that people are more productive alone, but more creative together: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/marissa-mayer-work-from-home_n_3117352.html http://flexibleboss.com/2013/10/10/hp-scales-back-home-working/

Social: To complicate the productivity issue further, it seems that productivity drops for some employees when homeworking, possibly due to isolation, distraction, or the need for greater supervision: https://www.2degreesnetwork.com/groups/2degrees-community/resources/does-working-home-work/ https://www.2degreesnetwork.com/groups/2degrees-community/resources/homeworking-avoiding-isolation/

Then there are other issues. Some have found that homeworking can reduce absenteeism and staff turnover and there are cost benefits to employers in reducing office estates. It can also improve resilience: https://www.2degreesnetwork.com/groups/2degrees-community/resources/six-reasons-why-flexible-working-could-help-your-business-thrive/ https://www.2degreesnetwork.com/groups/2degrees-community/resources/flexible-working-increasing-engagement-decreasing-emissions-with-o2-video/

But the long term impacts of changing work patterns have not received as much attention so far: social, air pollution exposure, congestion, additional utilities costs for employees and pressure on employees who find it difficult to work productively from home due to having smaller homes, noisier neighbourhoods, or homes that are also occupied by others during working hours.

Of course, you can also have workplace accommodation at smaller satellite sites that blend the advantages and disadvantages of working from large central sites and working from home.

Will remote working be better for a given employer? It will probably depend on the size of the organisation, the type of work, the relative importance of productivity and creativity, where workplaces are located in relation to employee homes, whether staff need to travel during working hours, the local transport infrastructure, how well employees are paid, the flexibility of the approach and how well it has been thought through.

Peter Burgess

I learn something from the question by Allison Azaria and the response by Giles Liddell. What I learn is that a simple question on top of a very complex world is not going to get any answer that is useful and universal. My take on this is that most of the conversation about sustainability and socio-economic performance is really a huge waste of time.

That is not to say that better socio-economic performance would not be a better thing. I argue that the way we allocate resources in the modern world is essentially dysfunctional and in many cases deeply anti-social, but the ways we are using to change this behavior is not being very effective.

I cannot pretend to fully understand the maths of analysis of complex systems, but I do know that predictions in complex systems are mathematically unreliable. The chance of getting a big initiative promulgated from the top to be correct is very low ... on the other had a plethora of little ideas all pushing 'in the right direction' can result in rapid change and change that we really want.

I believe the implications of this are huge ... and we are probably further along on this journey than we probably realize.

Peter Burgess - TrueValueMetrics Multi Dimension Impact Accounting