Thanks for visiting the Digital Workplace Group (DWG) website. You'll see this post may refer to the "Intranet Benchmarking Forum (IBF)," the "Digital Workplace Forum (DWF)" or "IBF Live." But that doesn't match our website name!
In a nutshell, we merged IBF and DWF into one service and changed our name to "Digital Workplace Group." The new name represents the broader set of services we've grown to offer, beyond an original focus on just intranets. We also changed the name of our monthly webinar from "IBF Live" to "Digital Workplace Live."
Although we've relabelled things, we're proud of our decade+ history and have left this page intact. Enjoy your time on our site and please contact us with any questions or comments.
This is a guest blog post from Dan Pontefract, author of the new book Flat Army: Creating a Connected and Engaged Organization. Dan will join the Digital Workplace 24 show on 14 and 15 May as a special studio guest to discuss his book. Sign up for Digital Workplace 24 (free) to tune into the interview.
In a landmark 2007 paper published in the Journal of Applied Psychology called “The Good, the Bad, and the Unknown About Telecommuting: Meta-Analysis of Psychological Mediators and Individual Consequences”, authors Ravi Gajendran and David Harrison of the Department of Management and Organization at Pennsylvania State University dispelled the notion that working from home was bad for business or bad for employee morale.
It’s a paper I’m certain the internet company Yahoo! failed to read when it recently announced all 12,000+ employees had to begin working from Yahoo! offices 100 per cent of the time effective June 2013.
What did Gajendran and Harrison prove?
Through the review and analysis of 46 individual studies that featured 12,883 employees, these researchers determined working from home demonstrated seven positive outcomes:
- Employees had greater control over their environment proving causality to increased results and productivity.
- Due to less face-to-face interaction between the manager and the employee, the quality of their interactions actually increased.
- The balance of life and work – allowing for the flexibility of life’s curveballs and family matters – extended their wishes to do a good job.
- With an increase in autonomy came an increase in job retention and satisfaction.
- Stress was reduced due to a decrease in commuting, money on lunches and business attire.
- Commitment to the company increased – what we might call a likelihood to stay – due to the work from home option.
- Distractions decreased and performance increased whilst managers shifted their adjudication on results versus face-time.
I’ve noted previously that I’m a “Corporate Floater”, working wherever the wind takes me. This geographic flexibility sees me working from home roughly 50 per cent of the time. The other 50 per cent sees me in meeting rooms, hoteling stations, hotels, airplanes, lounges and coffee shops (I prefer an extra-hot double shot 8oz decaf latte, if you must know). Through my travels I am constantly plugged in, constantly in touch with everyone and anyone.
“If I didn’t have the flexibility to work from home I don’t believe I’d be the leader, employee or performer I am today.”
When I think back to the research of Gajendran and Harrison, I often smile. Why? Because for me, personally, they are absolutely right. If I was shackled to a desk or an office 100 per cent of the time, there is not a chance I’d be as motivated, engaged or productive as I am in my life today. I might not even use the collaborative technologies available to me as much as I do today.
I am a direct leader of 25 people and an indirect leader in an organization of 40,000 across many time-zones and countries. If I didn’t have the flexibility to work from home I don’t believe I’d be the leader, employee or performer I am today. As the Head of Learning and Collaboration I’m very interested (obviously, you might say) in employee engagement. Our team has an employee engagement score of 96 per cent. Each of the team members has an opportunity to work from home, whether it’s a little or a lot. Each of those employees uses our collaborative technologies to be productive and to get their objectives accomplished. Employee engagement across my entire organization is 80 per cent and we’re on a quest to see 70 per cent of the organization working from home on a part or full-time basis by 2015.
I personally believe – and can attest that – the seven positive outcomes outlined by the research above ring true for me, the team I’m a part of and the organization I’m employed by. There are many ingredients to creating an engaged team and/or workforce, but one that is crucial is offering a flexible work environment coupled by collaborative technologies.
Collaborative tools like virtual worlds, instant messaging, webcams, telepresence, micro-blogging, blogging, video/photo sharing in addition to good ole email help connections to continue and productivity to swell. If you believe a “work from home” program can be successful without at least some of the aforementioned tools, you are as misguided as whoever accepts hosting duties at the next Oscars.
It is in stark contrast to not only the recent decision made by Yahoo! but by countless organizations who continue to believe a 100 per cent work-from-the-office strategy is better for morale, productivity, innovation and collaboration.
And let us not forget the corporate bottom line. In 2009, Cisco reported its telecommuting and flexible work environment not only increased productivity and job satisfaction, it saved the company $277 million.
Make it your mission to help drive flexible working in your work, and use it as an opportunity to build out your set of collaborative technologies.
At that point, you can cheekily say to yourself, “ya, who is working from home today?”
Learn more about Dan’s book, Flat Army: Creating a Connected and Engaged Organization on Dan’s website. And sign up for a free pass for Digital Workplace 24 to hear a live interview.