Telework Rewriting the Home Rules - Case Study Example

Telework Rewriting the Home Rules Telework has become a common way of life for the modern society, compared to the traditional work culture which entailed people travelling from home to the place of work on a daily basis. Telework has been defined in different terms, but the most simplified definition of telework has been that telework is “working at a distance from the people who pay you” (Bertin and Denbeigh, 2001:1). The common perception and argument related to telework as is evident in most of the literature covering this topic is that telework has brought work liberation. There is no doubt that this argument is true, owing to the fact that telework has enabled people to work from any place at any given time, without the need to necessarily appear in office. Thus, it is not only possible for people to work from home, but it has now become possible for people to undertake work as part of leisure. For example, the concept of work as part of leisure is apparent in the statement; “When I arrived in Johannesburg, I jumped into a hire car and drove up to a game reserve... I parked next to an elephant quietly eating a small tree, and emailed London” (Pollard, 2000:16). Nevertheless, while the liberation brought about by telework in the lives of organizational workers is indisputable, most of the literature covering this topic has overlooked the effect of telework on transforming the home rules. I have had an opportunity to work from home, and my experience has been that telework changes home rules in different ways. In this respect, this reflective analysis seeks to focus on my experience of how telework changes impacts on the teleworker, and how such changes may impact the overall domestic welfare. Discussion Telework has brought about the liberalization of organizational work culture. Traditionally, working would not qualify for any other definition, other than for travelling to the workplace, remaining within the employers premises for eight hours accomplishing tasks, and later travelling back home (Huws, 2000). Thus, traditionally, workers had no liberty to work from wherever they found greater convenience. However, due to the technological advancement that has been registered in the past few decades, it is now possible for workers to work away from their employer’s premises, and remit their work through different technology tools and infrastructure. Personally, I have had an opportunity to work from home, doing data entry for a research-based organization. However, while I had all the opportunity to enjoy the liberalization and freedom that comes with telework, I also experienced that telework impacts on the home rules and the domestic culture through changing certain requirements in order to accommodate telework. The entry of paid work into home requires that time and space at home is adjusted to fit into the requirements of accomplishing the telework tasks (Madsen, 2003). There is no doubt that such adjustments might be minimal, since the adjustments might just require restructuring the living room or the bedroom to accommodate a table for a computer and the network cable, and the teleworker is good to go. However, the overall impact of such transformation on the domestic culture might be greater than can just be perceived at a glance. This is owing to the fact that the introduction of paid work at home then requires the introduction of work discipline and practices that did not exist at home before (Bertin and Denbigh, 2000). This means a whole new arrangement of the home life, since the teleworker must dedicate certain hours to accomplishing the required work tasks, yet such time was previously shared with the family. Domestic work is associated with its own routines and rhythms, which have to do with specific temporal and spatial patterns (Madsen, 2003). My personal experience while working at home was that even though there is the liberty of working at whatever time that may prove convenient, there are always deadlines which requires to be met. Therefore, even with the liberalization of work that comes with telework, the deadline and the set target issues also limit the freedom with which the teleworker can undertake the work from home. This limitation is likely to breed domestic conflict, on the event that meeting the set targets or deadlines would require the teleworker to extend the work beyond certain hours, thus eating into some hours that have been designed for family time. While the family may not have problem understanding that the need to meet the targets or to beat the deadline is indispensable, there is also a feeling of disrupted family or domestic norms, which may be uncomfortable for the family. The spatial and temporal changes are in turn associated with certain rules and shared values, which when breached by one member of the family can result in a domestic conflict. Therefore, the introduction of paid work at home has the effect of altering both the temporal and spatial patterns traditionally upheld at home, which in turn breeds domestic conflict. The conflict can in turn result in hindrances to effective work performance, if such changes are not introduced in a way that will accommodate the needs of all the members. Therefore, the domestic routines, rules and shared value highly determines how paid work can enter into the home environment, and if the work will be accommodated (Cooper, 1993). In this respect, although telework is associated with the liberalization of work, it bears with it the potential of breeding domestic conflicts, if it is not well managed. The major problem associated with telework, which I discovered from my experience of working from home, is that there is the tendency to adjust the home routines and patterns to fit with the telework demands. This is in itself a potential source of conflict at home, since adjusting the home routines to fit in the demands of telework might affect the other family members negatively. Thus, although the arrival of paid work has a potential of delivering certain economic benefits to the family, it is also essential that telework itself has to be adjusted to the home life, rather than adjusting home life to fit into telework (Fleming, 2005). My personal experience has been that there are numerous benefits associated with the concept of telework. In addition to the liberalization of work, telework allowed me to engage in simultaneous, duties, for example travelling while also making data entry required for the day. This flexibility therefore means that I have been able to accomplish simultaneous responsibilities of work and travelling for different events. The industrial revolution brought about the tight binding of the concepts of time and place as essential for the achievement of the workplace tasks (Madsen, 2003). Thus, the whole economic revolution that was brought about by the industrial revolution was specifically based on the productivity of workplace tasks that were fashioned as a bundle of time and place combination (Knights and Willmott, 1988). However, with the technological advancement and the need for more freedom of work, the modern work culture has attempted to unbind the tight bonding of time from place in the accomplishment of work tasks. Thus, with digital technologies, it is now possible for the organizational tasks to be distributed across employees working from multiple locations (Corbett, 2009). The fundamental advantage associated with the concept of telework is that it has enabled organizations to reduce the expenses associated with maintenance of the employees at a centralized place of work. On the other hand, telework has been associated with the advantage of enabling the teleworkers to meet their household needs and their family demands, while still reaping the benefit of paid work (Grint and Woolgar, 1997). Further the teleworkers benefit from reduced work expenses such as the expenses associated with travelling to workplace. Nevertheless, I have also had a personal experience that telework creates isolation and at times breeds boredom. Having been able to telework from home for some months, the feeling of wanting to be in some workplace where I could interact with colleagues and get to know their perception about the nature of work, how to address certain challenges associated with the nature of work and how to increase productivity became a reality. There were some days when I just felt like wanting to communicate with someone about my work, or even physically engage someone in issues related to the nature of work, but unfortunately there was no one to turn to. Despite the fact that the family can be supportive to the teleworker, there are certain work-related issues that are just not appropriate when introduced to the family life. Most especially, when there are issues associated with meeting the set targets or beating the deadlines, the teleworker needs support from colleagues who are undertaking the same nature of work. Thus, where such support is lacking, it is possible that the stress will eventually be transferred to the family. This is different from the traditional working arrangement, where the change from workplace environment and going home in the evening was a form of stress-relieving experience for workers. The change of environment is associated with the change of moods and attitudes (Huws, 2000). However, this experience is not available to a teleworker, owing to the fact that the teleworker works at home and remains at home later after worker, thus limiting the benefits of environment and work context change. Further, the benefits associated with the change of work environment is unavailable for teleworkers, once the teleworkers have been used to work from home for a lengthy period of time, and thus they develop the attitude of associating home with work (Pollard, 2000). This development can be detrimental both to the motivation and the productivity of the teleworker, because the teleworker requires moving away from home for a change of environment, yet the work is based at home. The detrimental effect to the motivation and productivity of the teleworker can be felt more, when the feeling of isolation and boredom is combined with domestic conflict and stress that might arise out of the change in the domestic routines and patterns as a result of the introduction of paid work at home. Thus, the paradox associated with telework is the fact that with it comes liberalization and isolation, which are two nonconforming and competing interests for a worker. The overall benefits derived from telework are mainly dependent on the situation of an individual worker. However, the impact of telework on human relationships might be far-reaching than the existing literature has been able to establish. This is because; the isolation of the teleworkers at home or at local geographical locations may have a negative effect on their social interaction and interpersonal communication orientation (Thompson, 1967). My personal experience related to telework is that it is advantageous in delivering the advantage of the freedom of discretion to the teleworker, since the teleworker is both spatially and psychologically removed from the employer (Madsen, 2003). The mere fact that a teleworker does not experience the face-to-face or direct supervision from the employer or the employer’s agents is in itself a reason major enough to make the teleworker feel psychologically and spatially free. The lack of direct supervision therefore means that there is an increased window of self-reliance in the scheduling of the required work tasks in accordance with the individual workers preferences. Further, when the teleworker is psychologically and spatially removed from the direct supervision of the employer, the teleworker has increased freedom of control over the means of accomplishing the set tasks (Toffler, 1980). Thus, while working from home, my experience was that the opportunity for control over how to schedule the work tasks and how to determine the means through which they will be achieved generated a feeling of autonomy, which in itself became a source of motivation. The feeling of autonomy for the teleworkers is not only derived from the freedom to determine the schedule for tasks and the means of accomplishing them, but also the freedom to fashion the work environment to suit the teleworkers preferences. For example, a teleworker can be able to fashion the home environment such that it is suitable for working in accordance with the teleworkers individual tastes, for example through organizing the room and table layout, ventilation and including entertainment such as cool music while working (Corbett, 2009). The effect is that the teleworker can become more productive, since the environment is motivating enough to make the teleworker feel comfortable according to the teleworkers own standards of work comfort. Further, my experience of working from home has also shown that telework increases the permeability and intrusion of the individual work life, which may in turn breed family conflict. The permeability and intrusion associated with telework may take the form of boundary permeability of work into family life, or the encroachment of family into the individual teleworker’s work life, since both work and family life shares both space and time (Land and Taylor, 2010). Most especially, while the teleworker is working from home, the psychological disengagement from work is difficult, which then has the potential of breeding time-based conflict. This is because, even during the stipulated family time when the teleworker is not supposed to be working, the psychological engagement with work may interfere with the teleworkers full concentration or participation in family activities or forums. This is completely different from the traditional work culture, where an individual completes work back in the office and goes home to relax, thus the worker is able to concentrate fully in the family forum and activities. The fact that a teleworker has fashioned the home work environment in accordance with his/her preferences may motivate the worker to continue working even beyond the required work time, which might in turn breed conflict with the family (Thompson, 1967). My personal experiences while working at home have further indicated that telework can easily result in career stagnation. The home environment is too comfortable for teleworkers, such that it becomes even difficult to fathom working in a regulated or controlled work environment, where the teleworker has no freedom of controlling the scheduling or the means of accomplishing the required work tasks. This high level of work comfort, coupled with the isolation that comes with working from home can easily result in career stagnation for a worker (Madsen, 2003). A teleworker has limited opportunities of interacting with the other colleagues or superiors at work. This in turn reduced the opportunity for professional development and growth that are associated with interpersonal interactions at the workplace. The social integration and interaction of workers within a workplace provides opportunities for professional growth and development, owing to the fact that workers can challenge each other in the course of their task accomplishment, while also assisting one another to learn more about the job (Valenduc and Vendramin, 2001). In this respect, it becomes easier for an individual employee to grow in work-related knowledge, skills and competence, as opposed to when an individual worker has designed an own system of work that is not challenged or threatened by the system of another colleague. Further, due to the limited interaction between a teleworker and the organizational system and culture at large, a teleworker has limited opportunities of passing the required tests of organizational functionality competency, even when such a teleworker might be competent in assigned tasks. Thus, despite the fact that telework is associated with numerous benefits, it might become too comfortable to allow a teleworker seek more opportunities that might advance his/her career. Further, personal experiences of working from home have also indicated that the nature of family and domestic setting is a major influence in the transferability of paid work to home. While the demand for working at home might be minimal, most especially because the required technology for telework such as computers and the internet are easily accessible and affordable, the domestic setting and the nature of the family can limit the extent to which paid work can be integrated with family life. For example, a teleworker with small children might experience a series of interruptions during the course of work, even if the teleworker may have a caretaker for the small children. The moment a small child cries, there is a tendency of the parent wanting to find out what has gone wrong. This is true even where the child is still under the trusted care of another person. Therefore, parents with small children will find the home environment most inconveniencing, and might opt to work from the employers premises, ad only get back home when the work is already completed, to concentrate with the other family responsibilities. Research has also indicated that individuals with larger families are required to spend more time in addressing the needs of all the family members, which may in turn limit the time available for working at home (Madsen, 2003). This also means that telework is also inconveniencing for teleworkers who have large families, and as such, those workers might opt to work from their employers offices, and come back to address the family issues once they have already dispensed with work responsibilities. Conclusion The fact that telework has delivered numerous benefits for the modern workers is not in doubt. Through telework, it is now possible for workers to work from anywhere and at any time, without being supervised by their employers. This freedom in turn creates the benefit of autonomy in scheduling and determining the means of accomplishing work tasks, while also having the freedom to fashion the home work environment in accordance with the teleworker’s preferences. Further, telework has also created opportunities for simultaneous accomplishment of responsibilities, where a teleworker can be working and at the same time taking care of other personal businesses. Nevertheless, despite all these benefits, telework has the potential of creating or accelerating family conflicts, if the process of introducing paid work at home is not managed effectively. Further, telework has the disadvantage of causing the isolation of the teleworker from the other working colleagues, while also being highly associated with the risk of career stagnation. Thus, the personal experience of working from home has taught that the benefits and limitations associated with telework are dependent on a teleworker’s individual situation. References Bertin, I and Denbigh, A (2000) The teleworking handbook: new ways of working in the information society, Kenilworth: Telework, Telecottage and Telecentre Association Cooper, R (1993) Organization/disorganization, in Hassard, J and Pym, D The theory and philosophy of organizations, London: Routledge: 167-195 Corbett, J M (2009) Technology, in Hancock, P and Spicer, A (eds) Understanding corporate life, London: Sage: 10-27 Fleming, P (2005) Workers’ Playtime?: boundaries and cynicism in a “culture of fun” program, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(3): 285-303 Grint, K and Woolgar, S (1997) The machine at work: technology, work and organisation. Cambridge: Polity Press Huws, U (2000) Today interview transcript, The Today Programme, Radio 4, Tuesday 3rd November Knights D and Willmott, H (1988) (eds) New technology and the labour process, Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Limited. Land, C. and Taylor, S (2010). Surf’s Up: Work, Life, Balance and Brand in a New Age Capitalist Organization. Sociology. [Online], 44 (3), pp395-413. Date Accessed 24 March 2015. DOI: 10.1177/0038038510362479 Madsen, S. R. (2003), The effects of home-based teleworking on work-family conflict. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14: 35–58. Olson, M.H. and Primps, S.B. (1984) ‘Working at home with computers – work and non-work issues’, Journal of Social Issues, 40 (3), 97-122. Pollard, J (2000) Business work: anyway, anyhow, anywhere, The Observer, 3 September, pp16 Ryan, M. (2013) ‘Teleworking: The myth of working from home’, BBC News Magazine online http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21588760. Last accessed 4th March 2013. Thompson, E P (1967) Time, work discipline and industrial capitalism, Past and Present, 38(56-97) Toffler, A (1980) The third wave, London: Pan. Valenduc, G. and Vendramin, P. (2001) ‘Telework: From distance working to new forms of flexible work organisation’, Transfer, 7 (2), 244-257. Zwick, D., Bonsu, S. K. and Darmody, A. (2008) ‘Putting consumers to work: “Co-creation” and new marketing govern-mentality’, Journal of Consumer Culture, 8 (2), 163-196. Read More