Telecommuting: Why we should embrace it

The COVID-19 pandemic compelled organizations to transition to telecommuting abruptly as businesses made instant decisions regarding whether to require workers to telecommute or shut down completely. The organizations that embraced telecommuting continued their normal operations while those that shutdown learned later that they had to support telecommuting to avoid losses. Some organizations had already embraced the phenomenon before the pandemic by migrating to the cloud and allowing employees to work online at specific times. Thus, these organizations transitioned to telecommuting easily since employees and leaders already understood how to telecommute besides having the necessary equipment. However, organizations that lacked the experience of telecommuting faced challenges when they attempted to transition to telecommuting. Initially, concerns such as productivity delayed the transition but as movement restrictions continued, it was clear that telecommuting would contribute to survival. While not all jobs can accomplished through telecommuting, the pandemic has accelerated the trend towards remote work culture in the long term. Previously, organizations embraced remote work slowly following the introduction of telecommuting technologies. In turn, this represented a lack of interest from organizations in investing in the necessary management and technological practices and the dominance of the traditional work culture. The dramatic shift within organizations towards telecommuting following the pandemic demonstrates a shift in work culture towards telecommuting as more organizations introduce remote work in their work culture.

Thus, an organization should embrace telecommuting because telecommuting contributes to cost savings, increases productivity, and enhances retention. The organization should also be aware of the different forms of telecommuting; the occupations that offer the most benefits when using telecommuting, the required infrastructure, and the potential challenges and drawbacks. The present report explores why the organization should embrace telecommuting. The report will also describe the meaning of the telecommuting concept and its various forms, factors influencing telecommuting, the prevalence of telecommuting, the benefits of telecommuting, and the challenges that telecommuters and organizations may face. The report will also offer recommendations regarding what organizations need to do to implement effective telecommuting programs.

Telecommuting Definition

Telecommuting is a new form of work arrangement in which employees complete their tasks remotely, online, and away from the office using ICT technologies such as desktop computers, laptops, tablets, and smartphones (Gajendran et al., 2014). Telecommuting does not necessarily involve working from home since the idea mainly focuses on work outside the premises of the organization with the use of ICT tools (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Thus, telecommuting can occur in different locations such as offices and homes. Telecommuting offers workers with opportunities to work at client sites, from shared locations, at home, or through platforms with the required technologies. The location of the work and the used facilities or technologies determine the telecommuting idea.

The telecommuting idea can also be considered based on various features (Smith et al., 2015). The idea can be defined based on the intensity of the work involved or the proportion of time an employee works from a site away from the traditional workplace. It can also be defined based on the time employees fulfil their tasks such as during normal working hours or modified working hours. Another element of the definition concerns the site of the work. These telecommuting features influence different outcomes of the concept. The intensity of telecommuting varies based on the available time for telecommuting. Some workers engage in telecommuting on a full-time basis while others do it on a part-time basis. Full-time telecommuters work all the time from home or a site away from the office using ICT technologies. Part-time telecommuters work partly from the firm premises, partly from home, or from a client site. Informal telecommuters work occasionally from home due to circumstances such as unplanned childcare or sickness. 

Telecommuting time can also be categorized based on whether workers engage in telecommuting during normal or modified working hours. Telecommuters can adapt their work so that they work sometime during the day, weekends, and evenings (Smith et al., 2015). Multi-site telecommuting involves working partly at home and partly at the company premises. Employees working from home for a single organization on a full-time basis are considered remote workers. Freelance work involves employees working for multiple organizations from home or a work site. Telecommuting can also involve workers working from different locations such as client sites using ICT tools. These workers are mobile telecommuters (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Mobile workers move regularly and use ICT tools to complete their tasks from any location while engaging in necessary communication with the organization from those sites. Example of mobile telecommuters include investment bankers, delivery drivers, or salespeople. Consequently, the present paper focuses on workers who are employed within the organization and can work fully or partly from home.

Telecommuting Trends

Statistics on telecommuting across organizations, occupations, and industries can offer insights into the scope of the utilization of telecommuting during normal working times and factors that influence the efficient use of telecommuting or that hinder its utilization. Most firms had already initiated telecommuting work forms as early as 2015 in which users in the OECD varied from 25% to 50% (EWCS, 2017). Differences across countries regarding the range of jobs involving telecommuting based on occupational roles are smaller than variations in actual jobs done remotely (EWCS, 2017). Factors such as the existing digital infrastructure, the age range of workers, the competencies of the workforce, managerial practices, and cultures drive the aforementioned differences. Besides, workers also engage in occasional telecommuting extensively than regular telecommuting. For example, 12% of employees in Germany telecommuted from home at least a single day every week compared to 1% of workers in Hungary who did so within four weeks in 2014. Nevertheless, 30% of employees in Germany engaged in occasional telecommuting in 2015 (EWCS, 2017). In the U.S., 43% of workers telecommuted from home in 2016 even though workers performed only 15% of work hours from home for the period 2011-2018 (Hensvik et al., 2020). The differences between occasional and regular telecommuting show that most workers face both technical and non-technical barriers to telecommuting. A majority of employees who can complete some roles from home may fail to do so due to inappropriate workspaces at home, which demonstrates the importance of organizational policies in supporting telecommuting.

The level of telecommuting also varies by sector. Knowledge-intensive sectors such as ICT and professional services and less knowledge-intensive market sectors such as retail and wholesale are the dominant users of telecommuting. The differences arise due to task needs since highly skilled workers in knowledge-intensive sectors can complete their tasks remotely with computers while workers in the manufacturing sector must be physically present at work sites to complete their tasks. Non-market industries such as social work and health also require the physical presence of workers. Additionally, a relatively high number of workers in the water supply, electricity, mining, construction, and agriculture also engage in telecommuting (EWCS, 2017). Significant differences within sectors can be observed. For instance, workers in non-market and education sectors including organizations such as the IMF telecommute significantly. 

Besides, workers in the real estate and other less knowledge-intensive market sectors also perform tasks remotely (EWCS, 2017). Even though most workers in public administration engage in occasional telecommuting, their share is small compared to sectors in knowledge-intensive market sectors that have similar roles. The potential of occupations to telecommute also varies. In particular, high skilled occupations such as professionals and managers telecommute regularly, which demonstrates that high skilled occupations are prone to telecommute. Telecommuting is lowest in the low- and medium-skilled occupations such as sales staff, production employees, or personal care employees that require workers to be physically present to complete tasks (EWCS, 2017). However, telecommuting in some of these occupations is frequent, particularly in market-oriented skill workers in the agricultural sectors.

Factors Influencing Telecommuting

Research shows that factors that influence telecommuting can be based on the family/home, the organization, the job, technology, and the individual (Masuda et al., 2017). All the factors must be fulfilled to support telecommuting. Technological factors contribute to the development of telecommuting because of the need for a reliable ICT infrastructure. Studies regarding the impact of ICT on telecommuting suggest a positive association between the potential of working outside the organization premises and ICT tools (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Technology facilitates the adoption of flexible work forms including telecommuting, which enhances the degree of autonomy of workers over their job. Technology is a crucial element of telecommuting given that the increasing use of ICT innovations contributed to the development of telecommuting (Smith et al., 2015). Besides, the widespread and continuous utilization of ICT tools such as mobile devices and computers accelerates the expansion of telecommuting. 

Family/home, organizational, and individual factors also influence telecommuting. Individual factors concern employees who can telecommute and include characteristics of telecommuters with factors that predict workers with the potential to telecommute (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Thus, some factors play a significant role in determining the propensity of workers to telecommute and the frequency of telecommuting. For instance, education and age possess significant statistical explanations regarding telecommuting practices. In particular, the sector in which people work and the type of job they do can explain the potential of the people to telecommute. Factors such as leasing, rental, or real estate occupations; flexible work schedules, families with children, and genders enhance the propensity of a worker to telecommute (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Other factors such as the work location and the distance influence the telecommuting frequency and choice.

Research also suggests that remote work or working from home comprise a limited practice in which only a few intellectual professions practice (Masuda et al., 2017). Men have a higher propensity for telecommuting compared to women, even though women have a higher propensity for engaging in intense telecommuting (Masuda et al., 2017). Other elements that increase the likelihood of telecommuting include familiarity with technology, tenure, and higher education level. Studies also show different outcomes in situations when the profile of the telecommuter is defined and the organization identifies the objective and benefits of telecommuting (Yang, 2020). Therefore, some organizations and scholars refer to telecommuting when seeking to create new ways of arranging jobs to facilitate the balance between work and life or to enhance flexibility through supporting the shift from home to work. Consequently, female workers are inclined towards part-time or full-time telecommuting and do so after being offered the required tools by their organization such as ICT equipment and workspace. Highly skilled male workers with positions of responsibility in an organization also embrace telecommuting (Yang, 2020). Thus, most organizations implement telecommuting as a novel way of organizing work to enhance flexibility and concession and usually focus on home/family and individual factors.

Organizational factors concern jobs that can be performed online and industries in which telecommuting offers alternatives to work organization (Overbey, 2013). Thus, knowledge-oriented industries and knowledgeable workers have a higher propensity for telecommuting. Some studies agree that telecommuting dilutes the hierarchical organizational structure. For instance, telecommuting at the social level can produce sustainable outcomes concerning long-term work-force management and resolve possible issues in the community (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Nevertheless, other researchers argue that workers who telecommute frequently outside traditional working hours face more time pressures than other workers do (Thulin et al., 2019). Women also face time pressures more than men do.

There are also legal, safety, and environmental factors that influence telecommuting. Environment factors largely influenced the emergence of telecommuting in addition to cost reduction initiatives within organizations (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Telecommuting initiative initially focused on decreasing the carbon footprint and pollution due to regular commuting. Organizations intended to minimize their environmental effect arising from their economic activities.

Regarding legal factors, there are no specific regulations regarding telecommuting. The failure of governments to establish regulatory frameworks of telecommuting contributed to its slow diffusion in organizations (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Regarding natural events such as pandemics, telecommuting contributes significantly to the survival of organizations by ensuring continued operations. For instance, the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic led to crises both in terms of health care and economic through leading to movement restrictions and a shift towards work from home programs. The health measures that arose following the pandemic such as confinement of people in homes and social distancing measures spurred the need for telecommuting in most organizations. The circumstances forced organizations to implement telecommuting since most organizations would not have shifted to telecommuting if the pandemic did not exist. Thus, environmental issues and risk from new pandemics act as drivers of telecommuting.

Benefits of Telecommuting

Telecommuting contributes to cost savings by enabling the organization to save office space expenses and decrease the time workers spend on travelling. Additionally, telecommuting reduces labor expenses by expanding the number of workers an organization can select, which increases the supply of skills and enhances the ability of the organization to harmonize workers and jobs (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Firms also reduce their hiring expenses when workers are more satisfied with their work as telecommuting increases retention. Studies also show that organizations supporting telecommuting pay lower salaries to their workers than if the workers completed their tasks in-person because the combination of factors that enhance work-life balance influence workers to accept reduced salaries to benefit from autonomy and other benefits of telecommuting (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Regarding employees, work motivation increases when telecommuting because workers can live in affordable houses that do not necessarily have to be close to the office.

Employees are also more productive when telecommuting. Studies show that telecommuting can improve productivity because remote workers take less rest time (Bloom et al., 2014). Telecommuting enhances work productivity by increasing job satisfaction and efficiency through factors such as fewer distractions, less commuting time, or improved work-life balance, which enables workers to focus more or have more work time due to reduced absenteeism (Arora & Khatri, 2020). Research shows that telecommuting increases the efficiency of workers in which firms that support self-managed work time or trust-based job practices gain more through increased innovation and increased effort from workers (Yang, 2020). Besides, widespread telecommuting can result in vital spillover effects on job satisfaction through decreasing traffic congestion and particulate matter and carbon emissions (Bloom et al., 2014). Employees engaging in telecommuting increase their productivity for the same working hours compared to employees who work traditionally. 

Besides, telecommuting offers workers increased autonomy, which results in higher job satisfaction levels (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Even though remote workers work for more hours than their in-person counterparts do, the effectiveness of telecommuters rely on their work at peak efficiency time. In particular, those workers with excellent time management skills perform better compared to workers without the skills (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Time management competency is a crucial resource as it reduces time pressure, which results in increased productivity and job satisfaction for telecommuters. The increased autonomy creates a flexible work setting since workers feel free to organize their schedule and workspace. They can fulfil their taste and needs as they can tailor their work settings based on their preferences

Another element related to increased productivity concerns the possibility of remote workers performing their tasks during the most productive time. The increased autonomy offers telecommuters the ability to decide when to work, when to start the work, and when to complete their work. In turn, this introduces a regularity that correlates positively with individual preferences due to the increased power to control the work situation at home (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Telecommuters can also establish ways of reducing distractions at home, which further increases their productivity. Telecommuters also trust in their ability and usually establish relational trust with their supervisors and co-workers. Research shows that trust is a critical component for remote workers because this type of work involves virtual interactions with others including supervisors (Makarius & Larson, 2017). Telecommuters build trust through actively participating in their work, offering timely responses, and delivering expected or agreed results (Makarius & Larson, 2017). In turn, the support and trust from their supervisors increase job satisfaction, which enhances productivity. Thus, the policy and the attitude of the organization towards telecommuters influence the productivity of workers. Employees who feel that the organization cares for them, trust them, and offers them with sufficient resources, excellent project management, and training to telecommute will contribute more to productivity than those who think otherwise.

However, studies suggest that professional and social isolation in addition to reduced communication with co-workers adversely affect telecommuters (Bloom et al., 2014). In contrast, remote working reduces inappropriate interactions with co-workers, which allows telecommuter to use the additional time to work more and increase their productivity (Yang, 2020). In most organizations, the office or workplace depicts the status of workers. Nevertheless, telecommuting eliminates this component because remote workers usually select suitable workspaces without distractions and with better work conditions and work ergonomics (Yang, 2020). In turn, this increases their productivity besides increasing job satisfaction.

Research also shows that telecommuting enhances retention since remote workers achieve higher job satisfaction rates compared to those working in offices. Retention is related to teleworking through predictors such as work-life balance and job satisfaction. Telecommuting generally results in positive outcomes regarding job satisfaction (Yang, 2020). The most important element in the relationship between telecommuting and retention concerns the extent of telecommuting since workers who engage in moderate telecommuting levels such as several days per week gain more satisfaction than workers who engage in full-time telecommuting due to professional and social isolation related to remote working (Thulin et al., 2019). Generally, high retention levels occur for telecommuters due to improvements in the overall work-life balance even if the workers are not satisfied with their job. In particular, telecommuting enables workers to combine their work with the ability to address issues in the family because of the increased autonomy that allows them to set aside adequate time for family matters (Yang, 2020). In turn, this allows the workers to balance family and work time. The possibility to deal with family issues such as caring for children results in high job satisfaction levels, which leads to positive work outcomes. 

Besides, telecommuting offers the possibilities of working remotely in case an employee falls sick. The flexibility aspect matters in these situations because if the organization does not impose limitations on working hours and offers workers the freedom to determine work time and place, job satisfaction increases (Yang, 2020). The ability to telecommute offers alternatives to being present at work as the possibility to work from home even while sick increases job satisfaction (Thulin et al., 2019). Nevertheless, factors such as internal motivation, ability, time management skills, self-efficacy, and self-discipline are also important because workers without the motivation and discipline to telecommute will achieve negative work outcomes, which will reduce their job satisfaction. 

Moreover, when workers telecommute, they avoid spending their energy and money on travelling to the office or going on work trips. Employees also benefit from not being compelled to wear official clothes during work time, which enables them to match their work and their preferences. Telecommuters also experience less stress than office workers experience and have a less likelihood of changing their job, which results in reduced turnover rates. In turn, this leads to high motivation and job satisfaction. Studies suggest that increased motivation allows employees to achieve job satisfaction (Gajendran et al., 2014). Motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic. People are motivated intrinsically through being stimulated internally without external influence such as colleagues or the organization. Intrinsically motivated people have individual reasons for being motivated. However, extrinsically motivated people are influenced by external factors such as the organization through different things including incentives, free lunch, bonuses, or rewards. 

Motivation at work is related strongly to job satisfaction and workers who are intrinsically motivated to telecommute gain more through increased levels of job satisfaction and performance. Telecommuting benefits the contextual and task performance of workers by enhancing perceived autonomy in which workers determine the location, the time, and the way to work individually. Autonomy acts as a surplus resource in which telecommuters channel it toward performing tasks and citizen behavior. They do this due to motivation because increased autonomy meets the intrinsic needs of workers for meaning and self-determination (Gajendran et al., 2014). Telecommuters are satisfied with their life generally because remote working allows them to focus more, overcome challenges, appreciate their daily events, and experience less stress and sleep issues (Gajendran et al., 2014). Retention benefits both the organization and workers because increased retention rates result in savings on training and hiring costs.

Another role of telecommuting is that it offers environmental benefits and decreases energy use both at the individual and business level. Key benefits include cost-savings, reduction in carbon emissions, improvements in air quality, and improvement in environmental awareness among workers and organizations (Masuda et al., 2017). Compared to the habits of workers in the office, telecommuters consider the fossil fuels they burn, the amount of water they use, and the outlets they use due to increased awareness of their utility costs (Elldér, 2020). Telecommuters also save fuel costs, as they do not travel regularly. Besides, more telecommuters result in fewer cars on roads and fewer pollutant emissions. Cars emit volatile organic compounds that can lead to respiratory problems. Extensive telecommuting programs can contribute significantly to improvements in air quality because fewer people need to commute to work each day. Telecommuting also results in reduced levels of carbon emissions owing to the issues of climate change. Studies show that commuters in the U.S alone produce 3.2 metric tons of carbon dioxide each day (Elldér, 2020), which can be reduced through telecommuting.

Potential challenges

Despite the numerous benefits of telecommuting, the organization must be prepared to address the challenges that arise from embracing telecommuting. For instance, studies show that telecommuting does not guarantee productivity improvements, particularly in situations in which organizations find it hard to monitor the performance of their workers (Frakes & Wasserman, 2016). Thus, employees working remotely can engage in habits such as procrastination that decrease productivity or can be distracted by family chores or noise due to lack of managerial monitoring. Telecommuting prevents managerial oversight and increase principal-agent issues (Bonet & Salvador, 2017). Additionally, telecommuting transforms performance evaluation from focusing on inputs such as work time to focusing on outputs, which means that managers must give up some control over employees. In turn, workers get more opportunities to do what they want including things unrelated to work.

Additionally, the professional isolation that arises due to telecommuting can adversely affect the well-being of workers (Bonet & Salvador, 2017). While strategies such as co-working remotely can address the issue of isolation, situations such as the social distancing measures currently in place to combat the pandemic mean that workers must work individually. Telecommuting is effective during normal situations when workers alternate remote work with in-person contacts (Bloom et al., 2014). The absence of physical contacts reduces knowledge flows among workers since physical contacts and interactions allow employees to learn and acquire competencies through practicing their knowledge (Bonet & Salvador, 2017). In turn, this can affect innovation and long-term performance negatively as telecommuting adversely affect productivity growth. The reason for the adverse effect is that the positive relationship between collaborative research output and physical contacts occurs through chance encounters when people are in the same physical environment (Bonet & Salvador, 2017).

Telecommuting can also adversely affect the career development of employees because studies show that organizations are less likely to promote remote workers than equally productive workers who complete their tasks in offices (Bloom et al., 2014). Studies also associate extensive telecommuting with lower growth in salaries and fewer promotions (fewer-bro). Nevertheless, remote workers who set aside time for in-person contacts with managers or those who engage in supplemental tasks outside regular hours achieve better outcomes. The reason for fewer promotions is that a majority of managers perceive in-person employees better compared to remote workers (Bloom et al., 2014). Managers think that remote workers are less productive than in-person workers, which is in contrast to self-reports from remote workers that telecommuting improves productivity, motivation, and concentration. 

Another potential challenge concerns the ability of the organization to manage and monitor the performance of telecommuters. The issue arises from the limited accessibility of workers aggravated by the lack of physical contacts and the benefits related to physical contacts. Telecommuting requires effective communication, especially if the tasks to be completed involve teams (Abdullah & Norashikin Ismail, 2012). Studies support the idea that effective communication occurs through personal contacts than through digital forms such as phone calls, chats, or emails (Shwartz-Asher & Ahituv, 2019). Personal communication is effective because it is more persuasive, draws more attention, or allows participants to observe communication cues and act accordingly (Shwartz-Asher & Ahituv, 2019). The need to communicate remotely increases the number of disruptive communications forms to address the issue of the lack of physical contact. For instance, virtual meetings or email traffic may increase. Besides, inadequate physical communication can adversely affect engagement with organization stakeholders such as suppliers and clients, which influences the overall organizational performance negatively.

In general, telecommuting increases organizational productivity, which demonstrates the importance of ensuring that job satisfaction increase to adequate levels to offset the possible adverse outcomes on managerial supervision, communication, and knowledge flows. The intensity of telecommuting determines its effect on performance (Yang, 2020). High intensity telecommuting results in more adverse outcomes due to the absence of personal contacts. Low telecommuting levels, however, enhance job satisfaction because of increased opportunities for physical communication.

Recommendations

Given the benefits and challenges of telecommuting, organizations desiring to maximize the economic benefits of the trend must implement effective telecommuting policies. Since job satisfaction increases retention and job productivity among telecommuters, organizations must work towards enhancing job satisfaction. They can do this by ensuring that workers can choose between in-person or telecommuting modes as this hinders excessive telecommuting. The role of physical communication for innovation and complex tasks means that high-intensity telecommuting decreases employee efficiency and long-term productivity growth. Workers also possess individual preferences regarding how they want to work. 

Besides, telecommuting can erode work hours by resulting in extra work times. Thus, the organization must allow workers to choose freely whether to telecommute and how long they want to telecommute to maintain high productivity. Studies show that employees who are allowed to choose to telecommute achieve positive performance outcomes compared to employees who are forced to telecommute (Bloom et al., 2014). However, allowing a worker to choose does not guarantee improved productivity because workers may fail to consider the long-term adverse effects of their innovation decision. Thus, organizations should allow telecommuting to the extent that it improves productivity only.

It is also recommended that organizations establish policies that support better telecommuting settings. The working conditions and telecommuting determine the productivity gains arising from enhanced job satisfaction. Tools such as workspace, ICT tools, or child care matter in these situations. Telecommuting can also decrease job satisfaction through shifting certain costs such as increased electricity bills from organizations to workers. The organization may need to adjust the supporting infrastructure to support widespread telecommuting. 

Another important element is for organizations to develop best practices for managerial roles during telecommuting. The organization must adapt to the challenges and opportunities that telecommuting poses by complying with an output-based evaluation of performance to avoid hindering employees from telecommuting. Besides, organizations must focus on establishing trust associations between workers and managers as this reduces the need for managerial oversight. A manager should also create opportunities for sharing knowledge among workers to counter the adverse effects of telecommuting on growth in long-term productivity.

Moreover, the organization should provide access to reliable and safe ICT infrastructure to induce telecommuting and enhance work efficiency. Workers should be able to communicate efficiently through forms such as video conferencing, which still requires fast and reliable internet connections. Besides, privacy and security issues such as safety from cyber threats and transparency concerning the collection of employee data must be considered.

The present paper examined the importance of embracing telecommuting. While telecommuting offers greater benefits in terms of improved productivity, cost savings, and retention, most organizations were slow to implement telecommuting programs as one of their work structure until after the pandemic. The paper also identified the prevalence of telecommuting and potential challenges to telecommuting. The report shows that while telecommuting is an important trend throughout the world with various benefits, organizations need to understand the mechanisms that lead to the benefits to initiate effective telecommuting programs. Besides, knowledge-intensive sectors, people with higher education, and those in knowledge-intensive non-market service sectors have a high propensity to telecommute. The report also shows the underutilization of telecommuting within the public administration sector. Most of the tasks in the sector can be performed remotely but most organizations have not implemented telecommuting programs. In turn, this demonstrates the importance of establishing organizational cultures with telecommuting elements to support its utilization in the public administration sector. The paper used the analysis to recommend best practices for the development of appropriate telecommuting programs that benefit both workers and organizations. The recommendations emphasize the importance of assessing the needs of the organization and the workers before implementing sufficient policies. The report enhances a better understanding of the way telecommuting benefits organizations when implemented. The organization can use the analysis and the recommendations as the basis for supporting the implementation and enlargement of telecommuting programs for workers.

References

Abdullah, H., & Norashikin Ismail. (2012). Quality of Work and Life Balance in Teleworking. International Business Management , 6 (2), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.3923/ibm.2012.119.130

Arora, D. R., & Khatri, D. B. (2020). Telecommuting and its Implications in the Era of COVID-19: Issues, Challenges & Opportunities. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health , 23 (17). https://doi.org/10.36295/asro.2020.23202

Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2014). Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics , 130 (1), 165–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju032

Bonet, R., & Salvador, F. (2017). When the Boss Is Away: Manager–Worker Separation and Worker Performance in a Multisite Software Maintenance Organization. Organization Science , 28 (2), 244–261. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1107

Elldér, E. (2020). Telework and daily travel: New evidence from Sweden. Journal of Transport Geography , 86 , 102777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102777

EWCS. (2017).  European Working Conditions Survey, 2015 . [data collection].  3rd Edition.  UK Data Service. SN: 8098,  http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-8098-3

Frakes, M., & Wasserman, M. F. (2016). Procrastination in the Workplace: Evidence from the U.S. Patent Office. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2888061

Gajendran, R. S., Harrison, D. A., & Delaney-Klinger, K. (2014). Are Telecommuters Remotely Good Citizens? Unpacking Telecommuting’s Effects on Performance Via I-Deals and Job Resources. Personnel Psychology , 68 (2), 353–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12082

Hensvik, L., Le Barbanchon, T., & Rathelot, R. (2020, April). Which Jobs Are Done from Home? Evidence from the American Time Use Survey . Www.iza.org. https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13138

Makarius, E. E., & Larson, B. Z. (2017). Changing the Perspective of Virtual Work: Building Virtual Intelligence at the Individual Level. Academy of Management Perspectives , 31 (2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2014.0120

Masuda, A. D., Holtschlag, C., & Nicklin, J. M. (2017). Why the availability of telecommuting matters. Career Development International , 22 (2), 200–219. https://doi.org/10.1108/cdi-05-2016-0064

Overbey, J. A. (2013). Telecommuter intent to leave. Leadership & Organization Development Journal , 34 (7), 680–699. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-01-2012-0004

Shwartz-Asher, D., & Ahituv, N. (2019). Comparison between Face-to-Face Teams and Virtual Teams with Respect to Compliance with Directives. Journal of Service Science and Management , 12 (04), 549–571. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2019.12438

Smith, S. A., Patmos, A., & Pitts, M. J. (2015). Communication and Teleworking: A Study of Communication Channel Satisfaction, Personality, and Job Satisfaction for Teleworking Employees. International Journal of Business Communication , 55 (1), 44–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415589101

Thulin, E., Vilhelmson, B., & Johansson, M. (2019). New Telework, Time Pressure, and Time Use Control in Everyday Life. Sustainability , 11 (11), 3067. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113067

Yang, L.-Q. (2020). The Cambridge handbook of workplace affect . Cambridge University Press.