The Science of Working from Home

The pandemic has fuelled an acceleration of workplace change that seems irreversible. People have taken a peek through the looking glass and seen that they no longer desire the status quo.

In fact, new research by the CIPHR has shown that only 15% of UK workers want to remain in the office full-time after the pandemic. Over 1 in 10 want to make remote working permanent, and a massive 73% would accept a pay cut in order to make that a reality. There’s even been reports of employees quitting instead of giving up working from home.

But what does this mean for work? Is this all about an easier life, or do people perform better from home? Is it beneficial for organisations to adapt, or should they hold their ground? In this blog, we will look at the latest research and attain an objective view of the remote working revolution.

Productivity

The first big question is productivity. The use of workers is a major concern for organisations, and it’s easy to assume that working from home without supervision results in less work being done. The truth is blurrier.

An experiment using call centre employees found a 13% increase in productivity while working from home. But this was more than a simple efficiency increase. 9% devoted longer hours whilst taking fewer breaks and sick days, whilst 45% of the participants could take more calls per minute because of fewer distractions and a more conducive working environment. Once the study ended, they gave workers the choice between their homes or the office. Almost half chose the workplace, but productivity shot up another 7% for people who remained at home. This highlights that one approach doesn’t work for everyone; organisations must implement hybrid working solutions to meet everyone's needs.

“People are more productive working at home than people would have expected. Some people thought that everything was just going to fall apart, and it hasn’t. And a lot of people are actually saying that they’re more productive now.” – Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook.

Another study has shown different results. It ran comparisons on productivity before and during the work-from-home period of the COVID-19 pandemic using analytics data from a large Asian IT services company. It showed similar work intensification effects as the study above, with total work hours increasing by roughly 30%. Almost 20% of people were working outside of regular business hours. However, the average employee output did not significantly change despite these increases. This means it was taking people more time to produce the same results.

It’s important to remember that a significant amount of recent data came from during the pandemic. Whilst this has given researchers fertile ground from which to gain data, it’s also not a ‘normal’ WFH scenario. During the pandemic, there’s been a 30% increase in adults reporting symptoms of anxiety and depressive disorder. The World Health Organization estimates that depression and anxiety cost the global economy over £700 billion per year in lost productivity. So, it’s important to factor in these other aspects.

Creativity and Innovation

When looking at working from home, an important factor to consider is the type of work. Some jobs are routine tasks with little deviation, whilst others need adaptability and the ability to be creative.

One study found a discrepancy between the two types of work. It took “dull” work, such as data entry, and pitted it against creativity, such as coming up with unusual uses for everyday objects. It found that a home working environment had negative effects on productivity for ‘dull’ work, as much as a 10% drop in productivity. One hypothesis is that as the work is tedious, it’s easier to find distractions when outside the structure of an office cubicle. In contrast, the productivity of creative tasks saw a boost of up to 20%. This might be because people feel freer and less pressured at home, allowing them to think in unique ways. 

The ‘Allen Curve’ shows how engineers communicate less as distance of separation increases.

It’s important to note that sharing ideas can be vital for creativity, and remote work can inhibit this. Text chat, in particular, can be detrimental to creative performance. Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology say people rely on ‘micro-interactions’ to build the trust necessary for successful innovation, and these don’t occur in the current remote working landscape. The ‘Allen Curve’ supports this theory. This is a famous finding in communication theory that reveals the exponential drop in the frequency of communication between engineers as the distance between them increases.

“[In a remote work setting,] everything is framed in a very formal way. We lose the opportunity to catch a friend in the corridor and have an informal conversation in the office.” - Mehdi Bagherzadeh - professor of innovation at NEOMA Business School.

Organisations can mitigate this if they use technology in the right way. It was found that video communication can make up for the lack of face-to-face interaction. This standpoint is supported by research from Cologne, Lebniz, and Oxford. As HR tools improve, so will the prospect of remote collaboration.

Employee Well-Being

So far, the focus of the discussion has been areas important from an organisation's perspective, but it’s not all about what makes business sense. It’s important to consider the well-being of employees and whether remote working is beneficial to them on a personal level.

A survey ran in May 2020 found that 73% of working professionals are feeling burned out. This represents a 16% rise from results taken before mass working from home. Before the lockdown, the culprit was an unmanageable workload. Afterwards, people felt they were losing the separation between work and life. The survey also highlights the inadequate home office setup of many responders. Over 50% had aches/pain in their neck, shoulders, and backs. This reflects a general sentiment that organisations do not concern themselves enough with the health and safety of home workers’ setups.

Source: https://usblog.teamblind.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/StateofBurnoutCovid19.pdf

Despite these worrying statistics, another study by the Institutes of Employment Studies found that almost two-thirds of employers report an improvement in work-life balance from their staff. Assessing these results in tandem paints a picture of a double-edged sword. One where people cherish being able to switch between work and play quickly but then suffer from the cost of losing the concrete separation between these two worlds. 

It is again important to consider these results within the context of the national lockdown. People were working from home but then also stuck there afterwards. There were restrictions on sports, clubs, and meeting friends at the pub. As a result, people were less able to detach and socialise and more likely to feel trapped in one mode of being.

Despite some of these negative outlooks, remote working does have some positive side effects. Firstly, it completely removes commuting from the equation. A 20-minute increase in commute is as alarming as a 19% pay cut for job satisfaction. Every extra minute also reduces leisure time satisfaction, increases strain, and worsens mental health. Over two-thirds also feel less stress, especially for the 20% of people who say they face a hostile working environment. 

The state of employee well-being for remote workers is complex, and the pandemic’s blurring of the issue only complicates it. It’s clear that, with the right approach, people can find their lives enriched when working from home. However, organisations need to ensure that these people have the right environment and resources at home to promote the positive effects and lessen negative ones.

It’s not black and white

So, is remote working beneficial or harmful? Well, it depends. Factors such as the type of person, the type of work, and the suitability of their home environment all play vital roles in deciding whether it will work for organisations and individuals.

The best thing organisations can do is open a dialogue with their people. Make it a collaborative effort to find the right balance so that as many people benefit as much as possible. The worst thing to do is to try to force things one way or another, especially if that’s forcing people back in the office, as 39% of people would consider quitting if their employers weren’t flexible about remote work.

So, take the time to do things right. This is a significant moment in our work history; not treating it with the necessary caution could create big problems for your people and organisation.