« The wacky and weird of living in an Olympic host city | Home | Finally, a city celebrates its successes »
February 8, 2010
The coming blurred boundaries between work and home
Over the past year I’ve spent a lot of time analyzing the intersection of workplace trends and urban living trends. It’s becoming probable that the urban knowledge economy will require many workers to supply their own private workspace. Employers — or the city milieu itself — will be responsible for supplying the space for collaboration. This has pros and cons for individuals, employers as well as the city itself.
Increasingly, many office-based employers are literally breaking down walls to create a much more open environment for workers, often with the goal of increasing cross-communication among employees from different divisions and backgrounds. Gone will be the days of many individuals hunkered down in private offices or high walled cubicles. Those that have not yet done so often have making this change within their 5- year or 10-year plan.
Having worked in both environments, I have found open plan to be far more efficient for idea generation and collaboration. However, when I really need to focus and write down the results of the idea generation, or to build an Excel model or other tool to move a project forward, uninterrupted, private time can be essential. Most knowledge-based workers I speak with feel similarly, at least when it comes to the need to focus.
Some companies that have moved to open plan offer silent workspaces for such concentrated efforts — or even small bookable private offices. Many also allow employees to work from home when they feel the need for privacy.
Thinking ahead, I suspect many knowledge economy companies will increasingly rely on the employees to provide their own private spaces (which might be at home, might be at the library, might be on a park bench). The employer will offer only collaborative options and allow or expect people to find their own way to block-out or escape distractions when necessary.
Will this work? I think it might. It will allow employers to save some money on office space. (Although typically technology costs rise to supply more mobile options, thus possibly negating any real savings here. Time will tell.) And, it may allow many employees to better manage their own productivity as well as work-life balance needs.
Will employees resent being expected to supply their own workspace? I keep thinking that many will. But, I’ve yet to find anyone who will admit to being anything but excited at the prospect of generally being allowed to work from wherever they feel most productive.
Indeed, a major US financial institution I interviewed found that when given a choice, over 80% chose to go mobile — which meant giving up an assigned office, but having the privilege of working from anywhere. Most still came into “the office” 3 or 4 days per week, needing to stay in the loop on company happenings, collaborate with team members, and catch up with supervisors and mentors. Those that didn’t want to go mobile had typically only recently been promoted to a role with a private office and were therefore reluctant to give up this perceived status symbol.
This shift toward mobile work could really benefit the functioning of cities. What if everyone didn’t commute at the same time? Some people might find it more productive to work from home for a few hours, then head to the office mid morning. Others would come in early and leave early, finishing their workday from their patio in the sun. Those who prefer suburban living might not commute everyday.
What about you? would you resent or embrace the more flexible workplace, or the mobile-worker based city?
What other pros or cons do you see?
Topics: urban history, urban technologies, economic development, urban lifestyles |
February 8th, 2010 at 11:16 pm
[…] The coming blurred boundaries between work and home | All About Cities allaboutcities.ca/the-coming-blurred-boundaries-between-work-and-home – view page – cached Cities are fascinating. This blog explores the economy, society, communities, people, businesses, organizations, infrastructure, civil society and government of cities — and the tensions and connections between them. (More…) […]
February 10th, 2010 at 6:52 am
I believe people are already embracing the non-traditional work environment. See a Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE) here: http://gorowe.com
Of course, the transition into a different mindset, a different way of working/living will require adaptation. It is possible. It is happening.
Also, with regard to costs for employers to provide remote capabilities for its employees, this survey commissioned by Cisco and conducted by InsightExpress highlights the importance of providing such resources to prevent loss of productivity if a disaster were to hit. The costs for doing so are not that great either. An excerpt:
Cisco, which offers remote access solutions, argues that businesses that do not implement remote access solutions because of budget constraints have their cost/benefit analysis all wrong. “In most cases, cost to implement remote access across an entire workforce is a fraction of what the loss of business would be if employees could not work remotely during a crisis,” the slide says.
According to Fred Kost, director of security solutions marketing for Cisco, remote access solutions don’t have to be expensive, with simpler solutions costing only tens of dollars per employee.
February 10th, 2010 at 6:53 am
The link to more: ttp://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/if-disaster-struck-most-us-employees-could-not-work-remotely
February 10th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Michael, thanks for the information on ROWE as well as disaster planning.
You might find interesting all the spending on Cisco and Cisco-competitor information technology by Vancouver firms over the last year. The Olympics are kinda like a planned natural disaster for businesses in that employees will have trouble getting to work. Knowing this shut down of downtown was coming, many law firms, accounting firms and others finally purchased the equipment so employees could work remotely, securely.
I’ll have to blog this next week. It’s a fascinating side benefit of hosting the Games for the companies selling the technology, for disaster preparedness, and for freeing up the workforce.
February 12th, 2010 at 5:55 am
[…] + Tangentially related is this great article about the coming blurred boundaries between work and home. [All About Cities] […]
February 12th, 2010 at 9:20 am
Hi Wendy-
You are quite welcome! I recently Tweeted this article http://bit.ly/cYX57q about Vancouver businesses not really being prepared to deal with issues surrounding The Games. Some highlighted issues include: commuting, vacation time, and work hours….I like to throw in focus too.
In a ROWE, the above mentioned issues fade, so no “special” planning is needed for special events.
What is most fascinating is all the time these businesses had to prepare for The Games - Vancouver was selected in 7/2003!!! That speaks more directly to leadership than anything else…
February 20th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
I’d like to see more communities create pod offices where work-at-home professionals can rent board rooms, cubes, or just socialize for a bit. You see these in places like Gastown and Crosstown, but it would be great to have them in the West End, Kits, Commercial, Main and other densely poulated areas that could support them.
When I was in university, I had a dream of creating this sort of turnkey office system. I remember the co-op coordinator telling me to drop out of school to do it. Unfortunately, I have a big fear of monthly lease payments. LOL
February 27th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
Wendy,
I imagine one of the things that will help this trend is the shear size of the typically North American home, particularly in the suburbs. Bigger houses are more likely to have the extra room that such a work-at-home arrangement would require. Thus, to see the breakdown of this take-up of this perk by living location would be interesting. Will it only be those that live in the suburbs (and thus have the space to set up an office at home)? Will the fact that this ‘extra space’ in homes overseas is less common keep this movement to North America?