work from home challenges and opportunities essay

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The Realities of Remote Work

• Laura Amico

Work-life boundaries are blurring and managers worry about productivity. What can be done?

The Covid-19 pandemic sparked what economist Nicholas Bloom calls the “ working-from-home economy .” While some workers may have had flexibility to work remotely before the pandemic, this unprecedented shift to remote work looks like it could be here to stay in some form.

• Laura Amico is a former senior editor at Harvard Business Review.

Partner Center

How it works

Transform your enterprise with the scalable mindsets, skills, & behavior change that drive performance.

Explore how BetterUp connects to your core business systems.

We pair AI with the latest in human-centered coaching to drive powerful, lasting learning and behavior change.

Build leaders that accelerate team performance and engagement.

Unlock performance potential at scale with AI-powered curated growth journeys.

Build resilience, well-being and agility to drive performance across your entire enterprise.

Transform your business, starting with your sales leaders.

Unlock business impact from the top with executive coaching.

Foster a culture of inclusion and belonging.

Accelerate the performance and potential of your agencies and employees.

See how innovative organizations use BetterUp to build a thriving workforce.

Discover how BetterUp measurably impacts key business outcomes for organizations like yours.

A demo is the first step to transforming your business. Meet with us to develop a plan for attaining your goals.

• What is coaching?

Learn how 1:1 coaching works, who its for, and if it's right for you.

Accelerate your personal and professional growth with the expert guidance of a BetterUp Coach.

Types of Coaching

Navigate career transitions, accelerate your professional growth, and achieve your career goals with expert coaching.

Enhance your communication skills for better personal and professional relationships, with tailored coaching that focuses on your needs.

Find balance, resilience, and well-being in all areas of your life with holistic coaching designed to empower you.

Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.

Research, expert insights, and resources to develop courageous leaders within your organization.

Best practices, research, and tools to fuel individual and business growth.

View on-demand BetterUp events and learn about upcoming live discussions.

The latest insights and ideas for building a high-performing workplace.

• BetterUp Briefing

The online magazine that helps you understand tomorrow's workforce trends, today.

Innovative research featured in peer-reviewed journals, press, and more.

Founded in 2022 to deepen the understanding of the intersection of well-being, purpose, and performance

We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.

Join us and create impactful change.

Read the buzz about BetterUp.

Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.

For Business

For Individuals

12 challenges of working from home & how to overcome them

Jump to section

The necessity of working from home in 2020 and 2021

Why is it essential to identify the challenges of remote work, 12 challenges of working from home and how to overcome them, 10 tools to overcome the challenges of working remotely, the pros of working from home, embracing remote work for the long-term.

Working from home has gone from a dream to a reality for many people in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The challenges of working from home have also presented themselves.

The way we work has changed forever, and it seems like there’s no going back.

We all love doing Zoom meetings in our pajama pants and hanging out with our pets all day. That's a given. But remote work also has its drawbacks.

Let's take a look at 12 specific challenges of working from home and how to overcome them. We've included actionable work-from-home tips and solutions to help you while working remotely.

The trend of remote work was already growing before 2020. But when the COVID-19 pandemic hit , it skyrocketed.

In 2021, the pandemic continues to affect the way we work. Forty-five percent of remote workers report that they are working from home because of the outbreak . While 46% say their organizations plan on making remote work permanent.

( Image Source )

In spite of many people now finding themselves forced to work from home, it seems the majority are happy with the change and would like it to continue.

In fact, 97% of the remote workforce would like to continue working remotely at least some of the time for the rest of their careers. It seems that the benefits of remote work outweigh the drawbacks for employees.

The greatest benefits of working from home are similar for everyone. Whether you’re a veteran remote worker or have started working remotely since the pandemic.

The newer remote workers see not having to commute as the biggest advantage (28%) of working from home. While pre-pandemic remote workers see their flexible schedule (36%) as the most important benefit.

Other pros of working from home include:

• Being able to work from anywhere
• Spending more time with family
• Increased productivity
• Greater work-life balance
• Less stress
• Improved mental and physical health
• Reduced carbon footprint

Remote work — and its challenges and benefits — are here to stay. 

Team leaders, remote employees, freelancers, and entrepreneurs should follow the tips in this article to keep up motivation and productivity and reduce the risk of burnout.

If you need further support in overcoming the challenges of working from home, get in touch with BetterUp. Discover how one of our expert coaches can help you.

Thrive in your workplace

Connect with our Coaches to build stronger workplace relationships and cultivate a culture that drives success.

Elizabeth Perry, ACC

Elizabeth Perry is a Coach Community Manager at BetterUp. She uses strategic engagement strategies to cultivate a learning community across a global network of Coaches through in-person and virtual experiences, technology-enabled platforms, and strategic coaching industry partnerships. With over 3 years of coaching experience and a certification in transformative leadership and life coaching from Sofia University, Elizabeth leverages transpersonal psychology expertise to help coaches and clients gain awareness of their behavioral and thought patterns, discover their purpose and passions, and elevate their potential. She is a lifelong student of psychology, personal growth, and human potential as well as an ICF-certified ACC transpersonal life and leadership Coach.

Why always working long hours is ruining your productivity

Work addiction: signs and strategies to overcome it, how to help working parents navigating back-to-school, workaholic versus working long hours: which one are you, what do working parents need a supportive manager is a good start, working mothers fear that parenthood is negatively impacting their careers, when it comes to caregiving benefits, parents value time and money most, 12 benefits of teamwork that showcase the power of collaboration, what will make or break your next role find out why teamwork matters, similar articles, 12 work-from-home setup ideas & essentials, winning at wfh: what to ask a manager when you’re working from home, the success behind virtual teams: the ultimate guide, how to work from home with kids: 12 tips for remote and hybrid work, believe it or not, not everyone wants to work from home. here’s why., working from home these 25 tips will help you thrive, go mom 10 best work-from-home jobs for moms, how to work from home: a comprehensive guide, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..

3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702

• Platform Overview
• Integrations
• Powered by AI
• BetterUp Lead
• BetterUp Manage™
• BetterUp Care™
• Sales Performance
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Case Studies
• Why BetterUp?
• About Coaching
• Find your Coach
• Career Coaching
• Communication Coaching
• Life Coaching
• News and Press
• Leadership Team
• Become a BetterUp Coach
• BetterUp Labs
• Center for Purpose & Performance
• Leadership Training
• Business Coaching
• Contact Support
• Contact Sales
• Privacy Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Trust & Security
• Cookie Preferences

Essay on Work From Home

Students are often asked to write an essay on Work From Home in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Work From Home

Introduction.

Work from home is a flexible work arrangement where employees perform their job duties from their homes. It’s also known as telecommuting or remote work.

Working from home has several benefits. It saves commuting time, provides a comfortable work environment, and offers flexibility.

However, it also has challenges like distractions, lack of social interaction, and difficulty in separating work and personal life.

Despite the challenges, work from home is becoming increasingly popular due to advancements in technology and the need for flexible work arrangements.

Also check:

• 10 Lines on Work From Home

250 Words Essay on Work From Home

The concept of ‘Work From Home’ (WFH) has gained significant momentum in the wake of the digital revolution and more recently, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It involves performing job duties from home or a location other than a traditional office setup, leveraging technology to stay connected.

Advantages of WFH

WFH offers numerous advantages. Firstly, it eliminates commuting, saving time and reducing carbon footprints. Secondly, it offers a flexible schedule, allowing individuals to balance work and personal life more effectively. Thirdly, it can lead to increased productivity as employees work in their comfort zones, free from office distractions.

Challenges of WFH

However, WFH is not without its challenges. The lack of physical interaction can lead to feelings of isolation and loneliness. It also blurs the line between personal and professional life, potentially leading to burnout. Additionally, it requires self-discipline and time management skills, which not everyone may possess.

The Future of WFH

The future of WFH is promising. Companies are realizing that remote work does not compromise productivity and can, in fact, reduce operational costs. However, to make WFH truly effective, organizations need to invest in digital tools and foster a culture of trust and accountability.

In conclusion, WFH is a significant trend shaping the future of work. It offers numerous benefits but also poses unique challenges. As the world continues to navigate the digital age, it is imperative to understand and adapt to this new work paradigm.

500 Words Essay on Work From Home

Introduction to work from home.

The concept of Work From Home (WFH) has been a significant paradigm shift in the modern corporate world. It is a flexible working arrangement that allows employees to perform their tasks from their homes, leveraging technology and digital platforms. This essay delves into the intricacies of WFH, its advantages, drawbacks, and the future implications.

Advantages of Work From Home

WFH offers numerous benefits to both employees and employers. For employees, it eliminates the need for commuting, saving time and reducing stress. It provides a more flexible schedule, allowing individuals to balance their professional and personal lives more effectively. This flexibility often results in increased productivity, as employees can work during their peak energy times.

For employers, WFH can lead to cost savings in terms of reduced office space and utility bills. It also widens the talent pool as geographical restrictions are no longer a barrier in hiring. Furthermore, with the reduction in commuting, it contributes to environmental sustainability by reducing carbon emissions.

Drawbacks of Work From Home

Despite its advantages, WFH is not without its challenges. A significant issue is the blurring of boundaries between work and personal life, leading to the risk of overworking. The lack of face-to-face interaction can also result in feelings of isolation and may impact team cohesion and communication.

For employers, managing a remote workforce can be challenging. It requires robust technology infrastructure, effective communication tools, and new management styles. There are also concerns about data security and maintaining the confidentiality of sensitive information.

The Future of Work From Home

The future of WFH looks promising, with many companies planning to adopt hybrid models, combining remote and office work. This approach aims to maximize the benefits of both arrangements while minimizing their drawbacks.

However, it also necessitates a rethinking of traditional work models. It requires a shift in organizational culture, with an emphasis on results rather than hours worked. It also demands the development of digital competencies, both for employees and managers.

In conclusion, WFH is a complex phenomenon with multifaceted implications. While it offers numerous benefits, it also presents significant challenges. As we move forward, the key lies in finding a balanced approach that maximizes the advantages of WFH while mitigating its drawbacks. The future of work is likely to be a blend of remote and office-based work, requiring adaptability, resilience, and digital proficiency from all stakeholders.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Work Ethics and Professionalism
• Essay on Work and Leisure
• Essay on Women’s Rights

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

One Comment

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The bright future of working from home

There seems to be an endless tide of depressing news in this era of COVID-19. But one silver lining is the long-run explosion of working from home. Since March I have been talking to dozens of CEOs, senior managers, policymakers and journalists about the future of working from home. This has built on my own personal experience from running surveys about working from home and  an experiment  published in 2015 which saw a 13 percent increase in productivity by employees at a Chinese travel company called Ctrip who worked from home.

So here a few key themes that can hopefully make for some good news:

Mass working from home is here to stay

Once the COVID-19 pandemic passes, rates of people working from home will explode. In 2018, the Bureau of Labor Statistics  figures show  that 8 percent of all employees worked from home at least one day a week.

I see these numbers more than doubling in a post-pandemic world.  I suspect almost all employees who can work from home —  which is estimated  at about 40 percent of employees ­— will be allowed to work from home at least one day a week.

Why? Consider these three reasons

Fear of crowds.

Even if COVID-19 passes, the fear of future pandemics will motivate people to move away from urban centers and avoid public transport. So firms will struggle to get their employees back to the office on a daily basis. With the pandemic, working from home has become a standard perk, like sick-leave or health insurance.

Investments in telecommuting technology

By now, we have plenty of experience working from home. We’ve become adept at video conferencing. We’ve fine-tuned our home offices and rescheduled our days. Similarly, offices have tried out, improved and refined life for home-based work forces. In short, we have all paid the startup cost for learning how to work from home, making it far easier to continue.

The end of stigma

Finally, the stigma of working from home has evaporated. Before COVID-19, I frequently heard comments like, “working from home is shirking from home,” or “working remotely is remotely working.” I remember Boris Johnson, who was Mayor of London in 2012 when the London Olympics closed the city down for three weeks, saying working from home was “a skivers paradise.” No longer. All of us have now tried this and we understand we can potentially work effectively — if you have your own room and no kids — at home.

Of course, working from home was already trending up due to improved technology and remote monitoring. It is relatively cheap and easy to buy a top-end laptop and connect it to broadband internet service. This technology also makes it easier to monitor employees at home. Indeed, one senior manager recently told me: “We already track our employees — we know how many emails they send, meetings they attend or documents they write using our office management system. So monitoring them at home is really no different from monitoring them in the office. I see how they are doing and what they are doing whether they are at home or in the office.”

This is not only good news for firms in terms of boosting employee morale while improving productivity, but can also free up significant office space. In our China experiment, Ctrip calculated it increased profits by $2,000 per employee who worked from home.

Best practices in working from home post pandemic

Many of us are currently working from home full-time, with kids in the house, often in shared rooms, bedrooms or even bathrooms. So if working from home is going to continue and even increase once the pandemic is over, there are a few lessons we’ve learned to make telecommuting more effective. Let’s take a look:

Working from home should be part-time

I think the ideal schedule is Monday, Wednesday and Friday in the office and Tuesday and Thursday at home. Most of us need time in the office to stay motivated and creative. Face-to-face meetings are important for spurring and developing new ideas, and at least personally I find it hard to stay focused day after day at home. But we also need peaceful time at home to concentrate, undertake longer-term thinking and often to catch-up on tedious paperwork. And spending the same regular three days in the office each week means we can schedule meetings, lunches, coffees, etc., around that, and plan our “concentration work” during our two days at home.

The choice of Tuesday and Thursday at home comes from talking to managers who are often fearful that a work-from-home day — particularly if attached to a weekend — will turn into a beach day. So Tuesday and Thursday at home avoids creating a big block of days that the boss and the boss of the boss may fear employees may use for unauthorized mini-breaks.

Working from home should be a choice

I found in the Ctrip experiment that many people did not want to work from home. Of the 1,000 employees we asked, only 50 percent volunteered to work from home four days a week for a nine-month stretch. Those who took the offer were typically older married employees with kids. For many younger workers, the office is a core part of their social life, and like the Chinese employees, would happily commute in and out of work each day to see their colleagues. Indeed,  surveys in the U.S.  suggest up to one-third of us meet our future spouses at work.

Working from home should be flexible

After the end of the 9-month Ctrip experiment, we asked all volunteers if they wanted to continue working from home. Surprisingly, 50 percent of them opted to return to the office. The saying is “the three great enemies of working from home are the fridge, the bed and the TV,” and many of them fell victim to one of them. They told us it was hard to predict in advance, but after a couple of months working from home they figured out if it worked for them or not. And after we let the less-successful home-based employees return to the office, those remaining had a 25 percent higher rate of productivity.

Working from home is a privilege

Working from home for employees should be a perk. In our Ctrip experiment, home-based workers increased their productivity by 13 percent. So on average were being highly productive. But there is always the fear that one or two employees may abuse the system. So those whose performance drops at home should be warned, and if necessary recalled into the office for a couple of months before they are given a second chance.

There are two other impacts of working from home that should be addressed

The first deals with the decline in prices for urban commercial and residential spaces. The impact of a massive roll-out in working from home is likely to be falling demand for both housing and office space in the center of cities like New York and San Francisco. Ever since the 1980s, the centers of large U.S. cities have become denser and more expensive. Younger graduate workers in particular have flocked to city centers and pushed up housing and office prices. This 40-year year bull run  has ended .

If prices fell back to their levels in say the 1990s or 2000s this would lead to massive drops of 50 percent or more in city-center apartment and office prices. In reverse, the suburbs may be staging a comeback. If COVID-19 pushed people to part-time working from home and part-time commuting by car, the suburbs are the natural place to locate these smaller drivable offices. The upside to this is the affordability crisis of apartments in city centers could be coming to an end as property prices drop.

The second impact I see is a risk of increased political polarization. In the 1950s, Americans all watched the same media, often lived in similar areas and attended similar schools. By the 2020s, media has become fragmented, residential segregation by income has  increased dramatically , and even our schools are starting to fragment with the rise of charter schools.

The one constant equalizer — until recently — was the workplace. We all have to come into work and talk to our colleagues. Hence, those on the extreme left or right are forced to confront others over lunch and in breaks, hopefully moderating their views. If we end up increasing our time at home — particularly during the COVID lock-down — I worry about an explosion of radical political views.

But with an understanding of these risks and some forethought for how to mitigate them, a future with more of us working from home can certainly work well.

Related Topics

More publications, the effects of medical debt relief: evidence from two randomized experiments, accounting for the rise in consumer bankruptcies, excess savings and twin deficits: the transmission of fiscal stimulus in open economies.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Researchers working from home: Benefits and challenges

Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary, Doctoral School of Psychology, ELTE Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Sociology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

• Balazs Aczel, 
• Marton Kovacs, 
• Tanja van der Lippe, 
• Barnabas Szaszi

• Published: March 25, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

The flexibility allowed by the mobilization of technology disintegrated the traditional work-life boundary for most professionals. Whether working from home is the key or impediment to academics’ efficiency and work-life balance became a daunting question for both scientists and their employers. The recent pandemic brought into focus the merits and challenges of working from home on a level of personal experience. Using a convenient sampling, we surveyed 704 academics while working from home and found that the pandemic lockdown decreased the work efficiency for almost half of the researchers but around a quarter of them were more efficient during this time compared to the time before. Based on the gathered personal experience, 70% of the researchers think that in the future they would be similarly or more efficient than before if they could spend more of their work-time at home. They indicated that in the office they are better at sharing thoughts with colleagues, keeping in touch with their team, and collecting data, whereas at home they are better at working on their manuscript, reading the literature, and analyzing their data. Taking well-being also into account, 66% of them would find it ideal to work more from home in the future than they did before the lockdown. These results draw attention to how working from home is becoming a major element of researchers’ life and that we have to learn more about its influencer factors and coping tactics in order to optimize its arrangements.

Citation: Aczel B, Kovacs M, van der Lippe T, Szaszi B (2021) Researchers working from home: Benefits and challenges. PLoS ONE 16(3): e0249127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127

Editor: Johnson Chun-Sing Cheung, The University of Hong Kong, HONG KONG

Received: September 24, 2020; Accepted: March 11, 2021; Published: March 25, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Aczel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All research materials, the collected raw and processed anonymous data, just as well the code for data management and statistical analyses are publicly shared on the OSF page of the project: OSF: https://osf.io/v97fy/ .

Funding: TVL's contribution is part of the research program Sustainable Cooperation – Roadmaps to Resilient Societies (SCOOP). She is grateful to the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) and the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) for their support in the context of its 2017 Gravitation Program (grant number 024.003.025).

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Fleeing from the Great Plague that reached Cambridge in 1665, Newton retreated to his countryside home where he continued working for the next year and a half. During this time, he developed his theories on calculus, optics, and the law of gravitation—fundamentally changing the path of science for centuries. Newton himself described this period as the most productive time of his life [ 1 ]. Is working from home indeed the key to efficiency for scientists also in modern times? A solution for working without disturbance by colleagues and being able to manage a work-life balance? What personal and professional factors influence the relation between productivity and working from home? These are the main questions that the present paper aims to tackle. The Covid-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to analyze the implications of working from home in great detail.

Working away from the traditional office is increasingly an option in today’s world. The phenomenon has been studied under numerous, partially overlapping terms, such as telecommuting, telework, virtual office, remote work, location independent working, home office. In this paper, we will use ‘working from home’ (WFH), a term that typically covers working from any location other than the dedicated area provided by the employer.

The practice of WFH and its effect on job efficiency and well-being are reasonably well explored outside of academia [ 2 , 3 ]. Internet access and the increase of personal IT infrastructure made WFH a growing trend throughout the last decades [ 4 ]. In 2015, over 12% of EU workers [ 5 ] and near one-quarter of US employees [ 6 ] worked at least partly from home. A recent survey conducted among 27,500 millennials and Gen Z-s indicated that their majority would like to work remotely more frequently [ 7 ]. The literature suggests that people working from home need flexibility for different reasons. Home-working is a typical solution for those who need to look after dependent children [ 8 ] but many employees just seek a better work-life balance [ 7 ] and the comfort of an alternative work environment [ 9 ].

Non-academic areas report work-efficiency benefits for WFH but they also show some downsides of this arrangement. A good example is the broad-scale experiment in which call center employees were randomly assigned to work from home or in the office for nine months [ 10 ]. A 13% work performance increase was found in the working from home group. These workers also reported improved work satisfaction. Still, after the experiment, 50% of them preferred to go back to the office mainly because of feeling isolated at home.

Home-working has several straightforward positive aspects, such as not having to commute, easier management of household responsibilities [ 11 ] and family demands [ 12 ], along with increased autonomy over time use [ 13 , 14 ], and fewer interruptions [ 15 , 16 ]. Personal comfort is often listed as an advantage of the home environment [e.g., 15 ], though setting up a home office comes with physical and infrastructural demands [ 17 ]. People working from home consistently report greater job motivation and satisfaction [ 4 , 11 , 18 , 19 ] which is probably due to the greater work-related control and work-life flexibility [ 20 ]. A longitudinal nationally representative sample of 30,000 households in the UK revealed that homeworking is positively related with leisure time satisfaction [ 21 ], suggesting that people working from home can allocate more time for leisure activities.

Often-mentioned negative aspects of WFH include being disconnected from co-workers, experiencing isolation due to the physical and social distance to team members [ 22 , 23 ]. Also, home-working employees reported more difficulties with switching off and they worked beyond their formal working hours [ 4 ]. Working from home is especially difficult for those with small children [ 24 ], but intrusion from other family members, neighbours, and friends were also found to be major challenges of WFH [e.g., 17 ]. Moreover, being away from the office may also create a lack of visibility and increases teleworkers’ fear that being out of sight limits opportunities for promotion, rewards, and positive performance reviews [ 25 ].

Importantly, increased freedom imposes higher demands on workers to control not just the environment, but themselves too. WFH comes with the need to develop work-life boundary control tactics [ 26 ] and to be skilled at self-discipline, self-motivation, and good time management [ 27 ]. Increased flexibility can easily lead to multitasking and work-family role blurring [ 28 ]. Table 1 provides non-comprehensive lists of mostly positive and mostly negative consequences of WFH, based on the literature reviewed here.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.t001

Compared to the private sector, our knowledge is scarce about how academics experience working from home. Researchers in higher education institutes work in very similar arrangements. Typically, they are expected to personally attend their workplace, if not for teaching or supervision, then for meetings or to confer with colleagues. In the remaining worktime, they work in their lab or, if allowed, they may choose to do some of their tasks remotely. Along with the benefits on productivity when working from home, academics have already experienced some of its drawbacks at the start of the popularity of personal computers. As Snizek observed in the ‘80s, “(f)aculty who work long hours at home using their microcomputers indicate feelings of isolation and often lament the loss of collegial feedback and reinforcement” [page 622, 29 ].

Until now, the academics whose WFH experience had been given attention were mostly those participating in online distance education [e.g., 30 , 31 ]. They experienced increased autonomy, flexibility in workday schedule, the elimination of unwanted distractions [ 32 ], along with high levels of work productivity and satisfaction [ 33 ], but they also observed inadequate communication and the lack of opportunities for skill development [ 34 ]. The Covid-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to study the WFH experience of a greater spectrum of academics, since at one point most of them had to do all their work from home.

We have only fragmented knowledge about the moderators of WFH success. We know that control over time is limited by the domestic tasks one has while working from home. The view that women’s work is more influenced by family obligations than men’s is consistently shown in the literature [e.g., 35 – 37 ]. Sullivan and Lewis [ 38 ] argued that women who work from home are able to fulfil their domestic role better and manage their family duties more to their satisfaction, but that comes at the expense of higher perceived work–family conflict [see also 39 ]. Not surprisingly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, female scientists suffered a greater disruption than men in their academic productivity and time spent on research, most likely due to demands of childcare [ 40 , 41 ].

In summary, until recently, the effect of WFH on academics’ life and productivity received limited attention. However, during the recent pandemic lockdown, scientists, on an unprecedented scale, had to find solutions to continue their research from home. The situation unavoidably brought into focus the merits and challenges of WFH on a level of personal experience. Institutions were compelled to support WFH arrangements by adequate regulations, services, and infrastructure. Some researchers and institutions might have found benefits in the new arrangements and may wish to continue WFH in some form; for others WFH brought disproportionately larger challenges. The present study aims to facilitate the systematic exploration and support of researchers’ efficiency and work-life balance when working from home.

Materials and methods

Our study procedure and analysis plan were preregistered at https://osf.io/jg5bz (all deviations from the plan are listed in S1 File ). The survey included questions on research work efficiency, work-life balance, demographics, professional and personal background information. The study protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board from Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary (approval number: 2020/131). The Transparency Report of the study, the complete text of the questionnaire items and the instructions are shared at our OSF repository: https://osf.io/v97fy/ .

As the objective of this study was to gain insight about researchers’ experience of WFH, we aimed to increase the size and diversity of our sample rather than ascertaining the representativeness of our sample. Therefore, we distributed our online survey link among researchers in professional newsletters, university mailing lists, on social media, and by sending group-emails to authors (additional details about sampling are in S1 File ). As a result of the nature of our sampling strategy, it is not known how many researchers have seen our participation request. Additionally, we did not collect the country of residence of the respondents. Responses analyzed in this study were collected between 2020-04-24 and 2020-07-13. Overall, 858 individuals started the survey and 154 were excluded because they did not continue the survey beyond the first question. As a result, 704 respondents were included in the analysis.

We sent the questionnaire individually to each of the respondents through the Qualtrics Mailer service. Written informed consent and access to the preregistration of the research was provided to every respondent before starting the survey. Then, respondents who agreed to participate in the study could fill out the questionnaire. To encourage participation, we offered that upon completion they can enter a lottery to win a 100 USD voucher.

This is a general description of the survey items. The full survey with the display logic and exact phrasing of the items is transported from Qualtrics and uploaded to the projects’ OSF page: https://osf.io/8ze2g/ .

Efficiency of research work.

The respondents were asked to compare the efficiency of their research work during the lockdown to their work before the lockdown. They were also asked to use their present and previous experience to indicate whether working more from home in the future would change the efficiency of their research work compared to the time before the lockdown. For both questions, they could choose among three options: “less efficient”; “more efficient”, and “similarly efficient”.

Comparing working from home to working in the office.

Participants were asked to compare working from home to working from the office. For this question they could indicate their preference on a 7-point dimension (1: At home; 7: In the office), along 15 efficiency or well-being related aspects of research work (e.g., working on the manuscript, maintaining work-life balance). These aspects were collected in a pilot study conducted with 55 researchers who were asked to indicate in free text responses the areas in which their work benefits/suffers when working from home. More details of the pilot study are provided in S1 File .

Actual and ideal time spent working from home.

To study the actual and ideal time spent working from home, researcher were asked to indicate on a 0–100% scale (1) what percentage of their work time they spent working from home before the pandemic and (2) how much would be ideal for them working from home in the future concerning both research efficiency and work-life balance.

Feasibility of working more from home.

With simple Yes/No options, we asked the respondents to indicate whether they think that working more from home would be feasible considering all their other duties (education, administration, etc.) and the given circumstances at home (infrastructure, level of disturbance).

Background information.

Background questions were asked by providing preset lists concerning their academic position (e.g., full professor), area of research (e.g., social sciences), type of workplace (e.g., purely research institute), gender, age group, living situation (e.g., single-parent with non-adult child(ren)), and the age and the number of their children.

The respondents were also asked to select one of the offered options to indicate: whether or not they worked more from home during the coronavirus lockdown than before; whether it is possible for them to collect data remotely; whether they have education duties at work; if their research requires intensive team-work; whether their home office is fully equipped; whether their partner was also working from home during the pandemic; how far their office is from home; whether they had to do home-schooling during the pandemic; whether there was someone else looking after their child(ren) during their work from home in lockdown. When the question did not apply to them, they could select the ‘NA’ option as well.

Data preprocessing and analyses

All the data preprocessing and analyses were conducted in R [ 42 ], with the use of the tidyverse packages [ 43 ]. Before the analysis of the survey responses, we read all the free-text comments to ascertain that they do not contain personal information and they are in line with the respondent’s answers. We found that for 5 items the respondents’ comments contradicted their survey choices (e.g., whether they have children), therefore, we excluded the responses of the corresponding items from further analyses (see S1 File ). Following the preregistration, we only conducted descriptive statistics of the survey results.

Background information

The summary of the key demographic information of the 704 complete responses is presented in Table 2 . A full summary of all the collected background information of the respondents are available in S1 File .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.t002

Efficiency of research work

The results showed that 94% (n = 662) of the surveyed researchers worked more from home during the COVID-19 lockdown compared to the time before. Of these researchers, 47% found that due to working more from home their research became, in general, less efficient, 23% found it more efficient, and 30% found no difference compared to working before the lockdown. Within this database, we also explored the effect of the lockdown on the efficiency of people living with children (n = 290). Here, we found that 58% of them experienced that due to working more from home their research became, in general, less efficient, 20% found it more efficient, and 22% found no difference compared to working before the lockdown. Of those researchers who live with children, we found that 71% of the 21 single parents and 57% of the 269 partnered parents found working less efficient when working from home compared to the time before the lockdown.

When asking about how working more from home would affect the efficiency of their research after the lockdown, of those who have not already been working from home full time (n = 684), 29% assumed that it could make their research, in general, less efficient, 29% said that it would be more efficient, and 41% assumed no difference compared to the time before the lockdown ( Fig 1 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.g001

Focusing on the efficiency of the subgroup of people who live with children (n = 295), we found that for 32% their research work would be less efficient, for 30% it would be no different, and for 38% it would be more efficient to work from home after the lockdown, compared to the time before the lockdown.

Comparing working from home to working in the office

When comparing working from home to working in the office in general, people found that they can better achieve certain aspects of the research in one place than the other. They indicated that in the office they are better at sharing thoughts with colleagues, keeping in touch with their team, and collecting data, whereas at home they are better at working on their manuscript, reading the literature, and analyzing their data ( Fig 2 ).

The bars represent response averages of the given aspects.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.g002

Actual and ideal time spent working from home

We also asked the researchers how much of their work time they spent working from home in the past, and how much it would be ideal for them to work from home in the future concerning both research efficiency and well-being. Fig 3 shows the distribution of percentages of time working from home in the past and in an ideal future. Comparing these values for each researcher, we found that 66% of them want to work more from home in the future than they did before the lockdown, whereas 16% of them want to work less from home, and 18% of them want to spend the same percentage of their work time at home in the future as before. (These latter calculations were not preregistered).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.g003

Feasibility of working more from home

Taken all their other duties (education, administration, etc.) and provided circumstances at home (infrastructure, level of disturbance), of researchers who would like to work more from home in the future (n = 461), 86% think that it would be possible to do so. Even among those who have teaching duties at work (n = 376), 84% think that more working from home would be ideal and possible.

Researchers’ work and life have radically changed in recent times. The flexibility allowed by the mobilization of technology and the continuous access to the internet disintegrated the traditional work-life boundary. Where, when, and how we work depends more and more on our own arrangements. The recent pandemic only highlighted an already existing task: researchers’ worklife has to be redefined. The key challenge in a new work-life model is to find strategies to balance the demands of work and personal life. As a first step, the present paper explored how working from home affects researchers’ efficiency and well-being.

Our results showed that while the pandemic-related lockdown decreased the work efficiency for almost half of the researchers (47%), around a quarter (23%) of them experienced that they were more efficient during this time compared to the time before. Based on personal experience, 70% of the researchers think that after the lockdown they would be similarly (41%) or more efficient (29%) than before if they could spend more of their work-time at home. The remaining 30% thought that after the lockdown their work efficiency would decrease if they worked from home, which is noticeably lower than the 47% who claimed the same for the lockdown period. From these values we speculate that some of the obstacles of their work efficiency were specific to the pandemic lockdown. Such obstacles could have been the need to learn new methods to teach online [ 44 ] or the trouble adapting to the new lifestyle [ 45 ]. Furthermore, we found that working from the office and working from home support different aspects of research. Not surprisingly, activities that involve colleagues or team members are better bound to the office, but tasks that need focused attention, such as working on the manuscript or analyzing the data are better achieved from home.

A central motivation of our study was to explore what proportion of their worktime researchers would find ideal to work from home, concerning both research efficiency and work-life balance. Two thirds of the researchers indicated that it would be better to work more from home in the future. It seemed that sharing work somewhat equally between the two venues is the most preferred arrangement. A great majority (86%) of those who would like to work more from home in the future, think that it would be possible to do so. As a conclusion, both the work and non-work life of researchers would take benefits should more WFH be allowed and neither workplace duties, nor their domestic circumstances are limits of such a change. That researchers have a preference to work more from home, might be due to the fact that they are more and more pressured by their work. Finishing manuscripts, and reading literature is easier to find time for when working from home.

A main message of the results of our present survey is that although almost half of the respondents reported reduced work efficiency during the lockdown, the majority of them would prefer the current remote work setting to some extent in the future. It is important to stress, however, that working from home is not equally advantageous for researchers. Several external and personal factors must play a role in researchers’ work efficiency and work-life balance. In this analysis, we concentrated only on family status, but further dedicated studies will be required to gain a deeper understanding of the complex interaction of professional, institutional, personal, and domestic factors in this matter. While our study could only initiate the exploration of academics’ WFH benefits and challenges, we can already discuss a few relevant aspects regarding the work-life interface.

Our data show that researchers who live with dependent children can exploit the advantages of working from home less than those who do not have childcare duties, irrespective of the pandemic lockdown. Looking after children is clearly a main source of people’s task overload and, as a result, work-family conflict [ 46 , 47 ]. As an implication, employers should pay special respect to employees’ childcare situations when defining work arrangements. It should be clear, however, that other caring responsibilities should also be respected such as looking after elderly or disabled relatives [ 48 ]. Furthermore, to avoid equating non-work life with family-life, a broader diversity of life circumstances, such as those who live alone, should be taken into consideration [ 49 ].

It seems likely that after the pandemic significantly more work will be supplied from home [ 50 ]. The more of the researchers’ work will be done from home in the future, the greater the challenge will grow to integrate their work and non-work life. The extensive research on work-life conflict, should help us examine the issue and to develop coping strategies applicable for academics’ life. The Boundary Theory [ 26 , 51 , 52 ] proved to be a useful framework to understand the work-home interface. According to this theory, individuals utilize different tactics to create and maintain an ideal level of work-home segmentation. These boundaries often serve as “mental fences” to simplify the environment into domains, such as work or home, to help us attend our roles, such as being an employee or a parent. These boundaries are more or less permeable, depending on how much the individual attending one role can be influenced by another role. Individuals differ in the degree to which they prefer and are able to segment their roles, but each boundary crossing requires a cognitive “leap” between these categories [ 53 ]. The source of conflict is the demands of the different roles and responsibilities competing for one’s physical and mental resources. Working from home can easily blur the boundary between work and non-work domains. The conflict caused by the intrusion of the home world to one’s work time, just as well the intrusion of work tasks to one’s personal life are definite sources of weakened ability to concentrate on one’s tasks [ 54 ], exhaustion [ 55 ], and negative job satisfaction [ 56 ].

What can researchers do to mitigate this challenge? Various tactics have been identified for controlling one’s borders between work and non-work. One can separate the two domains by temporal, physical, behavioral, and communicative segmentation [ 26 ]. Professionals often have preferences and self-developed tactics for boundary management. People who prefer tighter boundary management apply strong segmentation between work and home [ 57 , 58 ]. For instance, they don’t do domestic tasks in worktime (temporal segmentation), close their door when working from home (physical segmentation), don’t read work emails at weekends (behavioral segmentation), or negotiate strict boundary rules with family members (communicative segmentation). People on the other on one side of the segmentation-integration continuum, might not mind, or cannot avoid, ad-hoc boundary-crossings and integrate the two domains by letting private space and time be mixed with their work.

Researchers, just like other workers, need to develop new arrangements and skills to cope with the disintegration of the traditional work-life boundaries. To know how research and education institutes could best support this change would require a comprehensive exploration of the factors in researchers’ WFH life. There is probably no one-size-fits-all approach to promote employees’ efficiency and well-being. Life circumstances often limit how much control people can have over their work-life boundaries when working from home [ 59 ]. Our results strongly indicate that some can boost work efficiency and wellbeing when working from home, others need external solutions, such as the office, to provide boundaries between their life domains. Until we gain comprehensive insight about the topic, individuals are probably the best judges of their own situation and of what arrangements may be beneficial for them in different times [ 60 ]. The more autonomy the employers provide to researchers in distributing their work between the office and home (while not lowering their expectations), the more they let them optimize this arrangement to their circumstances.

Our study has several limitations: to investigate how factors such as research domain, seniority, or geographic location contribute to WFH efficiency and well-being would have needed a much greater sample. Moreover, the country of residence of the respondents was not collected in our survey and this factor could potentially alter the perception of WFH due to differing social and infrastructural factors. Whereas the world-wide lockdown has provided a general experience to WFH to academics, the special circumstances just as well biased their judgment of the arrangement. With this exploratory research, we could only scratch the surface of the topic, the reader can probably generate a number of testable hypotheses that would be relevant to the topic but we could not analyze in this exploration.

Newton working in lockdown became the idealized image of the home-working scientist. Unquestionably, he was a genius, but his success probably needed a fortunate work-life boundary. Should he had noisy neighbours, or taunting domestic duties, he might have achieved much less while working from home. With this paper, we aim to draw attention to how WFH is becoming a major element of researchers’ life and that we have to be prepared for this change. We hope that personal experience or the topic’s relevance to the future of science will invite researchers to continue this work.

Supporting information

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127.s001

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Szonja Horvath, Matyas Sarudi, and Zsuzsa Szekely for their help with reviewing the free text responses.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 5. Parent-Thirion A, Biletta I, Cabrita J, Vargas O, Vermeylen G, Wilczynska A, et al. Sixth European working conditions survey: Overview report. Eurofound (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working …; 2016.
• 6. US Department of Labor B of LS. American time use survey—2015 results. 2016;
• 7. Deloitte. The Deloitte Global Millennial Survey 2020: Millennials and Gen Zs hold the key to creating a “better normal” [Internet]. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu; 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 5]. https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/millennialsurvey.html
• PubMed/NCBI
• 23. Pinsonneault A, Boisvert M. The impacts of telecommuting on organizations and individuals: A review of the literature. In: Telecommuting and virtual offices: Issues and opportunities. IGI Global; 2001. p. 163–85.
• 40. Frederickson M. COVID-19’s gendered impact on academic productivity [Internet]. GitHub. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 15]. https://github.com/drfreder/pandemic-pub-bias
• 50. Barrero JM, Bloom N, Davis SJ. Why Working From Home Will Stick. Univ Chic Becker Friedman Inst Econ Work Pap. 2020;(2020–174).
• 53. Zerubavel E. The fine line. University of Chicago Press; 1993.
• 58. Nippert-Eng C. Calendars and keys: The classification of “home” and “work”. In: Sociological Forum. Springer; 1996. p. 563–82.

What’s next for remote work: An analysis of 2,000 tasks, 800 jobs, and nine countries

For many workers, COVID-19’s impact has depended greatly on one question: Can I work from home or am I tethered to my workplace? Quarantines, lockdowns, and self-imposed isolation have pushed tens of millions around the world to work from home, accelerating a workplace experiment that had struggled to gain traction before COVID-19 hit.

Now, well into the pandemic, the limitations and the benefits of remote work are clearer. Although many people are returning to the workplace as economies reopen—the majority could not work remotely at all—executives have indicated in surveys that hybrid models of remote work  for some employees are here to stay. The virus has broken through cultural and technological barriers that prevented remote work in the past, setting in motion a structural shift in where work takes place, at least for some people.

Now that vaccines are awaiting approval, the question looms: To what extent will remote work persist ? In this article, we assess the possibility for various work activities to be performed remotely. Building on the McKinsey Global Institute’s body of work on automation, AI, and the future of work, we extend our models to consider where work is performed. 1 The future of work in Europe: Automation, workforce transitions, and the future geography of work , McKinsey Global Institute, June 2020; The future of work in America: People and places, today and tomorrow , McKinsey Global Institute, July 2019; Jobs lost, jobs gained: Workforce transitions in a time of automation , McKinsey Global Institute, December 2017. Our analysis finds that the potential for remote work is highly concentrated among highly skilled, highly educated workers in a handful of industries, occupations, and geographies.

More than 20 percent of the workforce could work remotely three to five days a week as effectively as they could if working from an office. If remote work took hold at that level, that would mean three to four times as many people working from home than before the pandemic and would have a profound impact on urban economies, transportation, and consumer spending, among other things.

The virus has broken through cultural and technological barriers that prevented remote work in the past, setting in motion a structural shift in where work takes place, at least for some people.

More than half the workforce, however, has little or no opportunity for remote work. Some of their jobs require collaborating with others or using specialized machinery; other jobs, such as conducting CT scans, must be done on location; and some, such as making deliveries, are performed while out and about. Many of such jobs are low wage and more at risk from broad trends such as automation and digitization. Remote work thus risks accentuating inequalities at a social level.

The potential for remote work is determined by tasks and activities, not occupations

Remote work raises a vast array of issues and challenges for employees and employers. Companies are pondering how best to deliver coaching remotely and how to configure workspaces to enhance employee safety, among a host of other thorny questions raised by COVID-19. For their part, employees are struggling to find the best home-work balance and equip themselves for working and collaborating remotely.

In this article, however, we aim to granularly define the activities and occupations that can be done from home to better understand the future staying power of remote work. We have analyzed the potential for remote work—or work that doesn’t require interpersonal interaction or a physical presence at a specific worksite—in a range of countries, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, Mexico, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We used MGI’s workforce model based on the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) to analyze more than 2,000 activities in more than 800 occupations and identify which activities and occupations have the greatest potential for remote work.

The potential for remote work depends on the mix of activities undertaken in each occupation and on their physical, spatial, and interpersonal context. We first assessed the theoretical extent to which an activity can be done remotely. This depends on whether a worker needs to be physically present on-site to do a task, interact with others, or use location-specific machinery or equipment.

Many physical or manual activities, as well as those that require use of fixed equipment, cannot be done remotely. These include providing care, operating machinery, using lab equipment, and processing customer transactions in stores. In contrast, activities such as information gathering and processing, communicating with others, teaching and counseling, and coding data can theoretically be done remotely.

Additionally, employers have found during the pandemic that although some tasks can be done remotely in a crisis, they are much more effectively done in person. These activities include coaching, counseling, and providing advice and feedback; building customer and colleague relationships; bringing new employees into a company; negotiating and making critical decisions; teaching and training; and work that benefits from collaboration, such as innovation, problem-solving, and creativity. If onboarding were to be done remotely, for instance, it would require significant rethinking of the activity to produce outcomes similar to those achieved in person.

For instance, while teaching has moved to remote work during the pandemic, parents and teachers alike say that quality has suffered. Similarly, courtrooms have functioned remotely but are unlikely to remain online going forward out of concern for legal rights and equity—some defendants lack adequate connectivity and lawyers, and judges worry about missing nonverbal cues in video conferences.

So we have devised two metrics for remote work potential: the maximum potential, including all activities that theoretically can be performed remotely, and a lower bound for the effective potential for remote work, which excludes activities that have a clear benefit from being done in person (Exhibit 1).

To determine the overall potential for remote work for jobs and sectors, we use the time spent on different activities within occupations. We find that remote work potential is concentrated in a few sectors. Finance and insurance has the highest potential, with three-quarters of time spent on activities that can be done remotely without a loss of productivity. Management, business services, and information technology have the next highest potential, all with more than half of employee time spent on activities that could effectively be done remotely (Exhibit 2). These sectors are characterized by a high share of workers with college degrees or higher.

Remote work potential is higher in advanced economies

The potential for remote work varies across countries, a reflection of their sector, occupation, and activity mix. Business and financial services are a large share of the UK economy, for example, and it has the highest potential for remote work among the countries we examined. Its workforce could theoretically work remotely one-third of the time without a loss of productivity, or almost half the time but with diminished productivity. (Exhibit 3). Other advanced economies are not far behind; their workforces could dedicate 28 to 30 percent of the time to working remotely without losing productivity.

In emerging economies, employment is skewed toward occupations that require physical and manual activities in sectors like agriculture and manufacturing. The potential for time spent on remote work drops to 12 to 26 percent in the emerging economies we assessed. In India, for instance, the workforce could spend just 12 percent of the time working remotely without losing effectiveness. Although India is known globally for its high-tech and financial services industries, the vast majority of its workforce of 464 million is employed in occupations like retail services and agriculture that cannot be done remotely.

Although India is known globally for its high-tech and financial services industries, the vast majority of its workforce of 464 million is employed in occupations like retail services and agriculture that cannot be done remotely.

A hybrid model that combines some remote work with work in an office is possible for occupations with high remote work potential

For most workers, some activities during a typical day lend themselves to remote work, while the rest of their tasks require their on-site physical presence. In the US workforce, we find that just 22 percent of employees can work remotely between three and five days a week without affecting productivity, while only 5 percent could do so in India. In contrast, 61 percent of the workforce in the United States can work no more than a few hours a week remotely or not at all. The remaining 17 percent of the workforce could work remotely partially, between one and three days per week (Exhibit 4).

Consider a floral designer. We estimate that between half and one-quarter of his job can be done remotely. He can take orders by phone or online and contract for delivery through an app, but floral arrangement itself requires being in a shop where the flowers are stored in a refrigerated case and ribbons, moss, vases, and other materials used to create a floral design are at hand. To make a floral designer’s job more remote would require dividing his various tasks among all employees in a flower shop. In contrast, credit analysts, database administrators, and tax preparers, among others, can do virtually all of their work remotely. In general, workers whose jobs require cognitive thinking and problem solving, managing and developing people, and data processing have the greatest potential to work from home. These employees also tend to be among the highest paid.

The ability to work remotely also depends on the need to use specialized equipment. According to our analysis, a chemical technician could work remotely only a quarter of the time because much of her work must be done in a lab housing the equipment she needs. Among healthcare occupations, general practitioners who can use digital technologies to communicate with patients have a much greater potential for remote work than surgeons and x-ray technicians, who need advanced equipment and tools to do their work. Thus, among health professionals overall, the effective remote work potential is just 11 percent.

Even for the same activity, the context in which a job is done matters. Consider the activity “analyzing data or information,” which can be done remotely by a statistician or financial analyst but not by a surveyor. Crime scene analysts and workers who analyze consumer trends both engage in what O*NET describes as “getting, processing, analyzing, documenting and interpreting information,” but the former must go to the location of, say, a murder while the latter can do his work in front of a computer at home. A travel agent can calculate the cost of goods or services from a kitchen table, but a grocery clerk does that from behind a counter in a store.

And then there are jobs that require workers to be on-site or in person more than four days a week. Due to the physical nature of most of their work activities, occupations such as transportation, food services, property maintenance, and agriculture offer little or no opportunity for remote work. Building inspectors must go to a building or construction site. Nursing assistants must work in a healthcare facility. Many jobs declared essential by governments during the pandemic—nursing, building maintenance, and garbage collection, for example—fall into this category of jobs with low remote work potential.

This mixed pattern of remote and physical activities of each occupation helps explain the results of a recent McKinsey survey of 800 corporate executives  around the world. Across all sectors, 38 percent of respondents expect their remote employees to work two or more days a week away from the office after the pandemic, compared to 22 percent of respondents surveyed before the pandemic. But just 19 percent of respondents to the most recent survey said they expected employees to work three or more days remotely. This suggests that executives anticipate operating their businesses with a hybrid model  of some sort, with employees working remotely and from an office during the workweek. JPMorgan already has a plan for its 60,950 employees to work from home one or two weeks a month or two days a week, depending on the line of business.

Hybrid remote work has important implications for urban economies

Currently, only a small share of the workforce in advanced economies—typically between 5 and 7 percent—regularly works from home. A shift to 15 to 20 percent of workers spending more time at home and less in the office could have profound impacts on urban economies. More people working remotely means fewer people commuting between home and work every day or traveling to different locations for work. This could have significant economic consequences, including on transportation, gasoline and auto sales, restaurants and retail in urban centers, demand for office real estate, and other consumption patterns.

A McKinsey survey of office space managers conducted in May found that after the pandemic, they expect a 36 percent increase in worktime outside their offices, affecting main offices and satellite locations. This means companies will need less office space, and several are already planning to reduce real estate expenses. Moody’s Analytics predicts that the office vacancy rate in the United States will climb to 19.4 percent, compared to 16.8 percent at the end of 2019, and rise to 20.2 percent by the end of 2022. A survey of 248 US chief operating officers found that one-third plan to reduce office space in the coming years as leases expire.

The impact of that will reverberate through the restaurants and bars, shops, and services businesses that cater to office workers and will put a dent in some state and local tax revenues. For example, REI plans to sell off its new corporate headquarters before even moving in and instead begin operating from satellite offices. In contrast, Amazon recently signed leases for a total of 900,000 feet of office space in six cities around the United States, citing the lack of spontaneity in virtual teamwork.

As tech companies announced plans for permanent remote work options, the median price of a one-bedroom rental in San Francisco dropped 24.2 percent compared to a year ago, while in New York City, which had roughly 28,000 residents in every square mile at the start of 2020, 15,000 rental apartments were empty in September, the most vacancies in recorded history.

Nor is residential real estate immune from the impact of remote work. As tech companies announced plans for permanent remote work options, the median price of a one-bedroom rental in San Francisco dropped 24.2 percent compared to a year ago, while in New York City, which had roughly 28,000 residents in every square mile at the start of 2020, 15,000 rental apartments were empty in September, the most vacancies in recorded history. Conversely, bidding wars are breaking out in suburbs and smaller cities as remote workers seek less harried, less expensive lifestyles and homes with a room that can serve as an office or gym—though it is unclear how successful companies will be with workers scattered in far-flung locales.

Remote workers may also shift consumption patterns. Less money spent on transportation, lunch, and wardrobes suitable for the office may be shifted to other uses. Sales of home office equipment, digital tools, and enhanced connectivity gear have boomed.

Whether the shift to remote work translates into spreading prosperity to smaller cities remains to be seen. Previous MGI research in the United States and Europe has shown a trend toward greater geographic concentration of work  in megacities like London and New York and high-growth hubs, including Seattle and Amsterdam . These locales have attracted many of the same type of younger, highly educated workers who can best work remotely. It remains to be seen whether the shift to remote work slows that trend, or whether the most vibrant cities remain magnets for such people.

Organizations will have to adjust their practices to capture potential productivity gains from remote work

Is remote work good for productivity? Ultimately, the answer may determine its popularity, especially given the long period of waning labor productivity  that preceded the pandemic. So far, there is scant clarity—and widespread contradiction—about the productivity impact. Some 41 percent of employees who responded to a McKinsey consumer survey in May said they were more productive working remotely than in the office. As employees have gained experience working remotely during the pandemic, their confidence in their productivity has grown, with the number of people saying they worked more productively increasing by 45 percent from April to May.

With nine months of experience under their belts, more employers are seeing somewhat better productivity from their remote workers. Interviews with chief executives about remote work elicited a mixed range of opinions. Some express confidence that remote work can continue, while others say they see few positives to remote work.

With nine months of experience under their belts, more employers are seeing somewhat better productivity from their remote workers.

One impediment to productivity may be connectivity. A researcher at Stanford University found that only 65 percent of Americans surveyed said they had fast enough internet service to support viable video calls, and in many parts of the developing world, the connectivity infrastructure is sparse or nonexistent. Developing digital infrastructure will require significant public and private investment.

For women in particular, remote work is a mixed blessing. It boosts flexibility—not needing to be physically co-located with fellow workers enables independent work and more flexible hours—as well as productivity, with less time wasted commuting. Yet remote work also may increase gender disparity in the workplace, exacerbating the regressive effects of COVID-19. The female workforce in many economies is more highly concentrated in occupational clusters like healthcare, food services, and customer service that have relatively low potential for remote work. Previous MGI research on gender parity found that jobs held by women are 19 percent more at risk than jobs held by men simply because women are disproportionately represented in sectors most negatively affected by COVID-19.

Some forms of remote work are likely to persist long after COVID-19 is conquered. This will require many shifts, such as investment in digital infrastructure, freeing up office space, and the structural transformation of cities, food services, commercial real estate, and retail. It also risks accentuating inequalities and creating new psychological and emotional stresses among employees, including from isolation. For most companies, having employees work outside the office  will require reinventing many processes and policies. How long before someone invents the virtual watercooler?

The authors wish to thank Olivia Robinson, Gurneet Singh Dandona, and Alok Singh for their contributions to this article.

This article was edited by Stephanie Strom, a senior editor at the McKinsey Global Institute.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

What 800 executives envision for the postpandemic workforce

Ten things to know about gender equality

The future of work in America: People and places, today and tomorrow

Working From Home: 13 Challenges and How To Overcome Them

Updated: March 11, 2024

Published: November 08, 2022

If you’re reading this article while wearing Star Wars pajama pants and fuzzy slippers, you might just be working from home. 

In a post-pandemic world, 58 percent of US job holders report that they work from home at least part of the time. Of that group, 35 percent report working from home full time. 

Whether it’s a long commute, freezing air conditioners, or loud co-workers, working in an office can be a distracting experience. Nearly 98 percent of workers say they’d prefer to work remotely (at least some of the time) for the rest of their career. 

But from clingy pets to faulty WiFi, working from home has its own challenges — something many professionals are struggling to confront as hybrid work becomes the new normal. 

Working from home challenges and solutions 

Challenges of working from home for employees 

1. time management.

Employees have long raced against the clock to meet deadlines after weeks of procrastination — but working from home can magnify these challenges and make it harder to meet your goals. 

Without the structure of an office day, some people find that time just slips away. An errand turns into a day of window-shopping; a short walk becomes an hourlong neighborhood tour. While the spontaneity can feel great, coming home to tell your boss you can’t finish your assignment does not. 

How to solve it:

Map out your schedule each morning. List out priorities for the day, starting with the most time-sensitive tasks and working your way down to the “nice to haves.”

Time management tools such as time boxing , where you set aside designated amounts of time for each task you need to accomplish, can be helpful.

2. No work-life balance 

Without the drive or train ride to the office, the lines between the workday and the rest of the day can become blurry. It’s hard to tell your boss you’re away from your computer when you’re never actually away .  

Even if you’re not going into an office, create one at home. Whether you have a separate room or just a desk in a corner, make a dedicated space where you only do work. Do not use it for any other activities (e.g., eating, sleeping, relaxing). 

Dedicating a space for your day job allows you to physically step away from work when you sign off. Even if it’s just shutting your laptop and getting up from your work chair, this will send the message to your brain that it’s time to shift gears. 

3. Isolation 

Social interaction is limited or nonexistent in many remote work places. This can lead employees to feel disconnected and lonely, even if they’re part of a team and company. 

While the lack of water-cooler interactions is a huge relief for some, others need those social experiences to feel fulfilled and happy. 

Try injecting some form of social interaction into your day, even if it’s online. Schedule one-on-one Zoom coffee chats with teammates, or start a conversation in a Slack channel dedicated to getting to know one another. 

If online relationships feel too forced, try spending time in a co-working space or coffee shop. While you might not be striking up a conversation with the barista, it can feel comforting to see and hear other people during the day. 

4. Trouble communicating

Tying to avoid misunderstandings remotely can be a tricky craft. It’s difficult to read tone and gauge intentions over email and Slacks, and even Zoom eliminates helpful communication tools like body language and hand gestures. 

It’s also much easier for messages to slip through the cracks in a slew of digital messaging across different platforms. 

Be as clear as possible whenever you’re communicating with co-workers, whether you’re discussing what went wrong on a project or handing off work before vacation. Be direct when addressing conflict or feedback: Using veiled language to deliver hard messages can be even more confusing when you’re doing so over the computer or phone. 

When in doubt, err on the side of over-communicating with your manager and colleagues. Once miscommunication has crept into the team, it can be hard to come back from it. 

5. Increased distractions 

For many of us, home is a busy place: barking dogs, crying babies, relatives popping in and out, and neighbors who can’t get enough of their new speaker systems and leaf blowers. For some, the office was a place to get some peace and quiet.

Not to mention all the good things about home that quickly turn into distractions when you’re on a deadline: your television, that new book you want to start, and don’t get us started on how comfortable the couch is. 

Noise-canceling headphones can be incredibly helpful for concentrating in loud homes. Getting the help you need, if possible, for pets and child care can also free up your focus for work. 

To avoid getting sucked into household chores, or even more dangerous, your couch and the TV series you’re halfway through bingeing, try staying away from those spaces. The “out of sight, out of mind” saying holds here: Physically hiding your distractions will make it easier to concentrate. 

6. Technological/logistical issues 

We’ve all been there: Just as you’re about to ask everyone if they can see your screen, your WiFi goes out, freezing your face on the screen in an unflattering shot. 

Other common obstacles run the gamut of malfunctioning hardware and software without the support of on-site IT team members.

Always have a plan B ready. Call into your Zoom meeting from your cell if your WiFi gives out, or even consider using an ethernet cable to connect your computer to your router for an extra reliable connection. 

Try to stay patient and calm: After nearly three years of remote work, most people will respond with empathy and patience if you’re struggling, 

7. Increased or decreased supervision 

Working from home can exacerbate your manager’s leadership style: A strict boss may become an overbearing micromanager, while a lax one may leave you alone for weeks on end. You can’t just walk into an office to check on an unresponsive boss, or grab lunch with an anxious one. 

Making sure you have a clear line of communication with your manager: Set a weekly meeting time and keep a running shared document of everything you’re working on and any updates you have from day to day. 

Micromanagers can rest easy knowing that you have everything under control and can reference that document rather than sending yet another Slack. Managers who are too hands-off will be able to stay in the loop and make time to check in each week. 

8. Lack of motivation 

The buzz of the office and the energy of your co-workers can keep you going during long days. On the other hand, hearing your alarm going off but knowing that you don’t technically have to get up to make your Zoom meeting can make it hard to stick to your schedule. 

A snoozed alarm quickly becomes working from bed, staying in your PJs all day, and taking a quick nap between meetings instead of crossing an item off of your to-do list. 

Self-motivation is the most powerful form of motivation, and learning how to harness it can be the key to fighting your work-from-home apathy. 

Try to get involved in activities that light you up, whether that’s joining creative brainstorming sessions, learning a new skill, or pitching a side passion project to your boss. 

Look for learning opportunities whenever possible: Even in a position that feels dull, there’s often a chance to hone a new skill or take ownership of a project. 

Set long-term and short-term goals for your work and any side projects or personal endeavors. This will help you stay on track and have milestones to look forward to. 

9. Lack of networking 

While in-person networking is scary enough, building connections remotely can be particularly daunting. Work happy hours where you could naturally fall into a conversation with a manager have been replaced with uncomfortable Zoom meetings or nothing at all. 

Try to intentionally carve out networking opportunities. This could mean finding a mentor within your company, joining a professional organization within your industry, or organizing remote or in-person meetings with people in your field. 

10. Overworking 

With the absence of a coffee break chat or a long lunch with co-workers comes overworking, which can lead to burnout . 

If you’re finding yourself glued to your laptop when you previously would have met friends for drinks or hit the gym, you might be feeling exhausted and stretched thin. But just because you can work more than in your office days, doesn’t mean you should. 

Make sure you’re using your allotted paid time off — working without breaks is a surefire road to burnout. Also be sure to set boundaries with work, whether that’s a hard stop at the end of the day, a lunch break that you take no matter what’s going on, or a window of time every morning you block off for meditation. 

Lastly, list out only the tasks you must complete each day to stay on track, and don’t go beyond them. If you finish what you need to do early in the day, great! Take a break, breathe fresh air, or catch up with a friend rather than beginning on tomorrow’s work. 

11. Mental health challenges

For some, feeling isolated can cause bigger issues than just loneliness. Those who are extroverted and energized by others can find working remotely to be difficult. 

The lack of human connection can introduce mental health challenges like depression or anxiety. When people lose the human relationships they found fulfilling or comforting, they can be left with a void or yearning. 

If your mental health has been declining since you began working from home, getting in touch with a mental health professional, like a therapist, can be beneficial. 

In addition to seeking professional help, find ways to include the types of social interactions that brought you joy. Whether it’s scheduling a weeknight dinner with a friend, a Zoom lunch with your favorite co-worker, or joining your local book club, there are other ways to get that social interaction back and feel connected to a community. 

12. No spontaneity

Bumping into someone you haven’t seen since college on the subway or reaching for the same coffee at Starbucks as your CEO are serendipitous moments that no longer happen with remote work. 

Not only did little unexpected moments add variety to your days, but also they could lead to networking opportunities, new friendships, and other unexpected but positive outcomes. 

Inject new adventures wherever possible into your schedule, whether that’s exploring a new museum nearby, walking through a neighborhood you’ve never visited, or even trying a new restaurant for lunch.

13. Harder to build trust 

When you’re not directly in front of your manager or teammates, it can be harder to build relationships and trust. 

When your manager can’t see you coming in early, staying late, and physically sitting at your desk, it’s harder for them to know immediately if you’re reliable and hardworking. 

Communication is key: Keep your co-workers and boss in the loop with all of your projects. Also be sure to voice when something isn’t going well so that no one feels like the wool has been pulled over their eyes. 

Challenges of working from home for employers 

The above challenges are also difficult for employers who are striving to maintain their workforce and employee satisfaction while driving results. 

Managers may experience similar challenges — after all, they’re employees themselves. Issues such as trouble communicating, maintaining a work-life balance, and overworking can surface for many remote team leaders. 

Decreased communication and supervision, when paired with underperforming employees, can result in less productivity and more mistakes. On the other hand, having employees who overwork and feel burned out can result in a higher attrition rate, which further stresses remaining employees. 

To combat the challenges employees might be facing while working from home, employers need to help foster motivation and good work-life balance. Encourage time for fulfilling projects and career growth, and remind workers to take time off and unplug on weekends and holidays.  

Focus on communicating thoroughly: When employees are not in the office, communication needs to be clear, concise, and timely in order to ensure everyone is on the same page and nothing is slipping through the cracks. 

Working from home benefits

Though working from home can come with challenges, the pros far outweigh the cons for many. In Buffer’s 2022 State of Remote Work report, 67 percent of workers say flexibility in how they spend their time is the biggest benefit of remote work . 

This was followed by the flexibility to choose their work location (62 percent), saving time due to no commute (59 percent) and the ability to live where they want (55 percent). Nearly half of the workers surveyed also said that remote work was better for them financially. 

For many, working from home can eliminate discomforts and inconveniences that come with working from an office, leaving more time to be creative and productive. 

In particular, for those who have disabilities or mobility issues, nursing mothers, parents with young children, and many others, working from home can help reduce major day-to-day stressors. The decrease in commute, stress, and anxiety allows more time for enjoyable activities. Employees may even experience colds and the flu less frequently throughout the year. 

hbspt.cta._relativeUrls=true;hbspt.cta.load(53, 'ad22bdd9-fd50-4b35-a4f5-7586f5a61a1e', {"useNewLoader":"true","region":"na1"});

What did you think of this article .

Give Feedback

Don't forget to share this post!

Related articles.

5 Steps to Create an Outstanding Marketing Plan [Free Templates]

How to Use Google Calendar: 21 Features That'll Make You More Productive

It’s Gen Z’s Workplace Now, and It Looks Different

Ask The Hustle: What Should I Do After an Unexpected Layoff?

What Is Corporate Social Responsibility?

Ask the Hustle: How do you grow a social media following without buying followers?

8 of the Best Professional Bio Examples We've Ever Seen [+ Bio Templates]

Million-Dollar Mindfulness: How Many People Use Meditation Apps?

STAR Interview Method: The Ultimate Guide

Outline your company's marketing strategy in one simple, coherent plan.

Marketing software that helps you drive revenue, save time and resources, and measure and optimize your investments — all on one easy-to-use platform

Work From Home Essays

Remote working in the post-covid period and implication on leadership, comparison report; working from home vs. working from office, is it ethical for companies to monitor employees who are working from home, ethics, responsibility and sustainability, work-from-home and employee motivation during the covid-19 pandemic, to ascertain and diagnose the challenges and opportunities from employees who have moved to a remote working model, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

Advertisement

Work from home - A new virtual reality

• Published: 29 January 2022
• Volume 42 , pages 30665–30677, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Neha Tunk 1 &
• A. Arun Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4048-6389 2  

10k Accesses

9 Citations

Explore all metrics

The present study aims to contribute to the research of future possibility of Work from Home (WFH) during the pandemic times of Covid 19 and its different antecedents such as job performance, work dependence, work life balance, social interaction, supervisor’s role and work environment. A structured questionnaire was adopted comprising of 19 questions with six questions pertaining to work related infrastructure at home. Data was collected from 138 full time employees working from home which revealed the influence of work dependence, work environment and work life balance which were hypothesized to be directly related to the willingness to work from home in future if given an opportunity. Qualitative analysis revealed that job performance, social interaction and supervisor’s role related hypothesis are refuted. The study tries to bridge the gap between the existing research done in past during normal course of time and current pandemic. The current research of WFH during the Covid 19 in employees working from home in India is an attempt to assess the antecedents in current situation. These results have important theoretical and practical implications.

Similar content being viewed by others

Virtuality in Non-governmental Organizations: An Analysis from Working Conditions

Work from Home and its Impact on Lifestyle of Humanoid in the Context of COVID-19

The Impact of Work from Home (WFH) on Workload and Productivity in Terms of Different Tasks and Occupations

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The threat of a Covid 19 cataclysm has greatly increased over the past few months. The recent Covid 19 outbreak has brought the world to a standstill. Soon after the emergency was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO), all the nations including India began to enforce stringent rules of lockdown in order to curtail the spread of the deadly virus. All the offices, schools, manufacturing units, organizations, shopping malls, markets except healthcare and essential services were shutdown with a view to break the chain of spread. World is reeling in the midst of the novel corona-virus (COVID-19) pandemic with fear of rising death toll due to the deadly virus. Soon after WHO declared the COVID 19 as a pandemic, the Government of India has announced a complete lockdown. In this pandemic situation people from all over the world are facing difficulty to do work in the work place. It has advised companies to implement work from home policy for their staff as part of encouraging social distancing to curb spread of novel corona virus infection.

Hypothesis testing results with SEM

Six factor model of work from home

Due to the unprecedented circumstances, the employees from all the sectors have been impacted significantly. The social distancing and the self-isolation measures imposed by the Government has brought basic structural changes in the way employees work in organizations. Work from home these days has become the need of the hour for most of the working population in the contemporary way of work life and has become common for many employees around the globe (Vilhelmson & Thulin, 2016 ). The office workspace is now combined with the personal space. This has brought a mammoth change in the way employees work. The digital transformation and the virtual workspace have made the employees work together despite located in distinct places. The research conducted by Windeler et al. (Windeler et al., 2017 ) shows that maintaining a certain level of social interaction is important for employees’ functioning when they work from home. Extensive research has been done earlier which centred on the influence of work from home on employee performance (Allen et al., 2015 ; Bailey & Kurland, 2002 ; De Menezes & Kelliher, 2011 ; Gajendran & Harrison, 2007 ; Martínez Sánchez et al., 2007 ). Whereas some studies have also shown that working from home leads to better performance (Allen et al., 2015 ; Vega et al., 2014 ), others warn that working from home leads to social and professional isolation that confines knowledge sharing (Crandall & Gao, 2005 ; Arun Kumar & Shekhar, 2020 ) and leads to the intensification of labour (Felstead & Henseke, 2017 ; Kelliher & Anderson, 2009 ).

Previous researchers focused on working from home (Baker et al., 2007 ). Due to strong surge in employment of women and growing dual earners, flexible working has become important for balanced work and personal life (Russell et al., 2009 ). In modern times, employees have started to adopt various technologies to interconnect devices at home. The influence of technology on the routine home life is studied in earlier research (Grinter et al., 2005 ). Innovative technology and telecommunication have increased the possibility of working from the home. Work from home settings for the employee’s quality of working life were discussed in the earlier studies (Shamir & Salomon, 1985 ). The extensive review of literature has revealed that home office has positive influence and traditional office has negative influence on work life balance when job related factors and family related factors in three work settings namely traditional office, virtual office and home office was studied (Hill et al., 2003 ). Research of work from home during pandemic or emergency is limited due to the sudden upheaval it has created in the recent times.

In this paper an attempt is made to study the various factors related to willingness to work from home in future and its impact on performance, supervision, social interactions with teams. This study also attempts to study the relationship between various factors relating to WFH during the pandemic. It even attempts to study the effect of isolation from the physical workspace and the challenges encountered by the employees working in virtual workspace during the pandemic.

The corona virus pandemic popularly known as Covid 19 has left many employees confined to their homes. The present study focuses on the need arising due to corona pandemic across the world which has further restricted movement across different places during the lockdown. During this period the employees were asked to work from home without affecting organization’s productivity at the same time ensuring social distancing measures which were followed during the lockdown. The present study is trying to access the willingness and the future possibility of WFH as a post pandemic measure. This study shows our preparedness for the next level of new normalcy of virtual workspace. As a precautionary measure if there is an additional requirement to further curtail the movement of people or in order to cut down certain costs without effecting the productivity, the organizations may prefer employees to continue work from home. This study helps the organizations to understand the challenges and the preparedness of future contingencies.

Methodology

Respondents and research approach.

In this cross-sectional study, people from India were requested to participate in the study. Respondents were contacted and requested to fill the questionnaire online through google forms in WhatsApp. The participants were assured of anonymity and confidentiality of data. Their prior consent and willingness to participate in survey was taken. Both female and male respondents were included in the study. The study aimed to examine educated and qualified young professionals within the working age group working from home during the Covid 19 crisis. The convenient sampling technique was implied for collecting the data. Respondents were included in this study only if they were willing to respond. In total, more than 200 questionnaires were distributed. 138 of the total respondents accepted to participate in the study. The response rate for the study was calculated to be 70% which is sufficient to conduct the further analysis. All the participants who filled the form were employees working from home due to lockdown restrictions imposed by the nation, in order to break the chain of transmission of novel corona virus (Covid 19). The field work of the study was conducted during June to December 2020. Each section had several questions related to a particular construct. The first section in the questionnaire consisted of the basic demographic information of the participants, which includes age, gender, marital status, children, educational level and whether they were willing and able (whether they had the infrastructure) to work from home.

To provide the current status of WFH during lockdown comprehensively, the respondents were asked to answer the questions divided into 7 parts which are work related infrastructure at home, job performance, work dependence, work life balance, social interactions, supervisor’s role, work environment and willingness to work from home in future (Shown in Appendix Table  1 ).

Work from home practices in pandemic COVID-19 situation demonstrates multifaceted phenomena. The aim of this paper is to gain deeper insight of willingness to work from home post COVID-19. This paper is based on primary data as well as secondary data. The survey method was adopted to conduct the study. Based on the review of literature and the researcher’s understanding of the concept, a structured questionnaire was adopted.

The questionnaire consisted of 6 demographic questions, 6 pertaining to work infrastructure and 19 questions related to the core essence of the study (See Appendix Table 1 ). Questions on work related infrastructure at home was borrowed from the study done by Garg & van der Rijst, 2015 with slight modifications. The reliability of the questionnaire was checked by calculating the Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha value (See Table 2 ). This value depicts the reliability of a single uni-dimensional latent construct. The Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha of the overall scale for this study was calculated to be 0.708. A Cronbach’s coefficient alpha value of 0.60 was suggested as threshold for the Cronbach’s alpha reliability and acceptability (Pallant, 2013 ). This confirmed the internal consistency of the current study.

Job Performance

Job Performance was measured using three item scale used by Raghuram et al. ( 2001 ); Sims et al. ( 1976 ). This scale was also used by Garg and van der Rijst ( 2015 ). The sample question for job performance is “The measures of my job performance are clear.” One question pertaining to this has been added by the authors though not in scale as it is relevant for analysis “Employee engagement is more during the lock down”. Each item was measured using 5-point Likert scale with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree. The Cronbach alpha value for Job Performance is 0.75.

Work Dependence

Work dependence was measured using three item scale used in study done by Sims et al. ( 1976 ). The sample item is “My performance does not depend on working with others.” The scale items are anchored with strongly disagree as 1 and strongly agree as 5. The Cronbach alpha value for Work dependence is 0.84.

Work Life Balance

Work life balance during lockdown was measured using three item scale developed for the purpose of study. The sample questions are “Overall I am comfortable” (not considered due to model fit issues), “I am able to balance both work and household during the lock down” and “I feel it is difficult to maintain work life balance as I have to remain available all the time”. Each item was measured using 5-point Likert scale with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree. The Cronbach’s alpha value for this factor is 0.75.

Social Interaction

Social interaction was measured using three item scale used by Raghuram et al. ( 2001 ). This scale was also used by Garg and van der Rijst ( 2015 ). The sample item is “The work-related meetings in my office are adequate to build good working relationships”. The scale is anchored with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree. The Cronbach’s alpha value for this factor is 0.642.

Supervisors Role

Supervisor’s role was measured using three item scale developed for the purpose of study. The sample question is “My superior is very supportive in addressing problems during the lock down”. Each item was measured using 5-point Likert scale with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree. The Cronbach’s alpha value for this factor is 0.781.

Work Environment

Work environment was measured using three item scale used by Fonner and Roloff ( 2010 ). This scale was also used by Garg and van der Rijst ( 2015 ). The sample item is “I am distracted by other things going on in my work environment, such as background noise?”. The scale is anchored with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree. The Cronbach’s alpha value for this factor is 0.66.

Willingness to Work from Home in Future

The dependent variable willingness to work from home in future (FWFH) post covid crisis was measured using single item “I feel post pandemic also work from home permits should be given”. This was measured using 5-point Likert scale with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree.

Data Synthesis

To test the hypothesized model, a Structural Equation Model (SEM) was used. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 28) and Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS 28) was used for the study. The research analysis was conducted using two-step approach. Measurement model and Structural models were tested. The measurement model was checked for validity, internal consistency and reliability. To test the scale items Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used. Present study reported Comparative Fit index (CFI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Root Mean Residuals (RMR). The six latent constructs of the measurement model are tested to check if all the coefficients indicate FWFH. The coefficient values show that work dependence, work life balance and work environment are significant determinants of FWFH.

Extensive literature review has revealed the existing models developed by various researches. The Model framework proposed by Nordin et al., 2016 is as under. Previous research findings and the model framework set by Nordin et al., 2016 was studied. The change in the circumstances advocate the need for supplementary variables to the existing model. We would like to study the moderating effect of pandemic lockdown on employee preference to WFH post pandemic.

H1: There is a positive influence of job performance on employee’s willingness to FWFH

As it is identified by many researchers and evident from the previous literature that job performance is one of the essential components in the study of work from home. The authors Garg and van der Rijst ( 2015 ) have studied the relationship between the job performance and professional isolation. Job performance and work from home are related and are inter dependent. When there is clear understanding of job performance and when the job indicators are quantifiable, work from home possibility is more even after pandemic. Therefore, it is hypothesized as there is a positive influence of job performance on work from home in future.

H2: There is a negative influence of work dependence on employee’s willingness to FWFH

In past research was directed towards the importance of telecommuting and increasing work dependence (Vana et al., 2008 ). The study made by Garg and van der Rijst ( 2015 ) found that work dependence had a weak positive relation to experience with virtual work. The focus of present study is to assess the willingness of employees to work from home post pandemic. The present study is during the peculiar times of Covid 19 which makes the concept of WFH a unique one.

H3: There is a negative influence of social interaction on employee’s willingness to FWFH

Another important component of factors influencing willingness to work from home in future (FWFH) is Social Interaction. Previous studies (Baumeister & Leary, 1995 ) have highlighted that work from home with less social interaction in employees will make them aggravated due to isolation. Mintz-Binder & Allen, 2019 observed the factor social contact in terms of virtual meetings and online interactions. Many researchers in the past have focussed on the need to maintain firm and well-built interpersonal social relationships. There exists a negative influence of social interaction on work from home in near future.

H4: There is a positive influence of supervisor’s role on employee’s willingness to FWFH

Raghuram and Fang ( 2014 ) have studied the role of the supervisor in controlling the employees working from home. Previously Lautsch et al. ( 2009 ) have studied the general perceptions regarding supportiveness of supervisors. Madlock ( 2012 ) has studied the leadership styles and their results suggested that supervisors occupied in work oriented more than relational oriented leadership style in the virtual workplace.

H5: There is a negative influence of work environment on employee’s willingness to FWFH

According to Wheatley ( 2012 ), work from home eliminates the workplace related distractions and allows to work productively without interruptions. The results of the present study are in agreement with the study conducted by Golden ( 2007 ) which pointed out that the virtual technology like e-mail and online-conferences to interact with other employees lack the warmth and social presence of face-to-face interaction.

H6: There is a positive influence of work life balance on employee’s willingness to FWFH

Study conducted by Venkatraman et al. ( 1999 ) emphasised that working overtime informally without any extra payment affects the personal life of the employees. The study conducted by Tietze and Musson ( 2010 ) elicits that balance between work and home is essential to understand the relationship between household and professional life. The results of the present study agreed with a balanced work and family life will have greater willingness to work from home. Thus, the proposed hypothesis is that there is a positive influence of work life balance on the employee’s willingness to work from home in future (FWFH).

Demographic Profile of Respondents

The study consisted of 138 participants working from home during the lockdown. 21% of respondents were female whereas 79% were male. The largest group 58% fall in the age group of 18–25 years, 34% of respondents were in 26–35 years of age group and 36–45 years of the age group is represented by 8% in the current study. The largest group 50% are Professionals (None of them are front end medical workers), 24% are IT software employees and others represent 26% (Design engineers, BPO employees and backend support). In terms of the highest educational qualification, 45% of participants were degree/diploma holders, 40% were postgraduates and 16% were holding a professional qualification. None of them were below graduation level, the group is mature.

Data Screening

The responses were complete in all aspects. There is no missing data in the columns. Also, observed quite normally distributed data of our latent factors and other variables like job performance, work dependence, social interaction, supervisor’s role, work environment and work life balance. To measure the multivariate normality, kurtosis and skewness measures were used which was generated using AMOS 26. The data exhibited normal distribution which ranged from −1.3 to 2.04. The threshold value for Kurtosis and Skewness is −2 to +2 (Byrne, 2010 ). However, the value of 2.04 does not violate the normality. The threshold is 3.3 according to Skarpness, 1983 . This number indicates a good fit. Multivariate Analysis was suggested by Hu & Bentler, 1998 as an indication of goodness of fit. The multivariate measure in the study is 15.472 at critical ratio 1.298. The data is perfectly well behaved.

The present study has attempted to explore the structural relationship between the multiple factors relating to Work from Home. Questions were measuring the variables on five point Likert scale. This was run in SPSS 28 using Varimax with Normalization method for rotation. The rotation and iteration were run until the ultimate clear pattern matrix arrived. The factor patterns arrived under each column were thoroughly diagnosed to understand the plausible cross-loadings of factors and elimination of redundant variables (Brown & Moore, 2012 ). Six factors were identified under different heads like job performance (JP), work dependence (WD), work life balance (WLB), social interaction (SI), supervisor’s role (SR) and work environment (WE). These six factors explained were calculated from the sum of squared loadings from the structure matrix. The total accumulated variance explained is 71.709% for work from home during pandemic. The total variance explained by first factor job performance is 13.65%, the second factor work dependence is 13.656%, work life balance is 12.965, social interaction is 12.450, supervisor’s role is 10.392 and work environment is 8.998. Absolute values below 0.5 were eliminated. During the principal axis factoring, few items cross loaded on another component and few items in scale were deleted due to low factor loadings. An item in the job performance scale “There are objective criteria by which my performance can be evaluated” was cross loaded on supervisor’s role component during factor analysis. Third item in work life balance was deleted due to poor loading. The rotation converged in 7 iterations. Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant at 000 indicating the result was acceptably valid. In addition to this, the model fit indices were verified for the proposed factor structure. The CFA result yielded an adequate fit. The CMIN = 164.268, CMIN/df = 1.711, CFI = 0.922, RMSEA = 0.08, RMR = 1.55 (See Appendix Table 3 ). The overall model exhibited a good fit. The Harman single factor test was used for examining if the problem of common method variance (CMV) exists or not. All the factors have not significantly loaded on a single factor. This test confirms that CMV is not a significant problem in this study.

The job performance scaled on three measures. It is easy to measure and quantify employee performance (with path coefficients = 0.932), the measures of employee job performance are clear (with path coefficients = 0.829), the feeling that employee engagement is more during the lockdown (with path coefficients = 0.704). The hypotheses that there exists a positive influence of job performance on employee’s willingness to WFH in future is refuted with estimate of 0.003 at p value greater than 0.05. There is a negative influence of work dependence on employee’s willingness to WFH in future. In this factor three aspects of work dependence are measured, the extent to which the employee performance depends on working with others (with path coefficients 0.892), the need to work independently for performing the best (with path coefficients 0.872), the nature of work in terms of independent task or projects (with path coefficients 0.675). All three are significant with p value less than 0.05. However, the study has revealed the negative influence of Work Dependence on employee’s willingness to work from home in future post pandemic situation. It may be inferred that the higher degree of WFH is associated with weakened work dependence. This is due to the inter-dependence of departments for work completion. Like for example, the dependence on IT department for setting up remote access to all the employees for completion of work during the sudden lockdown. Next, social interaction was measured. The first item, social interactions are more in the current lock down situation (deleted due to low loadings), The work-related meetings in my office are adequate to build good working relationships (with path coefficient 0.915), the social events in virtual office are adequate to build a sense of community (with path coefficient 0.725). The research hypotheses relating to negative influence of social interaction on employee’s willingness to WFH in future is refuted in the current study. The relationship between social interaction and willingness to WFH in future is −0.193 at p value greater than 0.05. Thus, we refute the hypothesis.

The results of the present study hypothesize that there is a positive influence of supervisor’s role on employee’s willingness to WFH in future has been refuted. In the present study focused on three aspects of supervisory role. The first being close supervision of work during the lockdown (with path coefficients 0.902). Secondly, employees understanding on the criteria for evaluating the performance was studied (with path coefficients 0.760). Lastly, the support extended by the superior in addressing problems during the lockdown (with path coefficients 0.673) was studied. The supervisor’s role estimated −0.002 at p value more than 0.05. Thus, hypothesis is rejected under study that there is a positive influence of supervisor’s role on employee willingness to WFH in future.

Hypothesis results have revealed that there is a significant negative influence of work environment on employee’s willingness to WFH in future (with path coefficients −0.245). In this factor, three aspects of work environment were measured, the interruption caused when colleagues talk in virtual meetings (with path coefficients 0.746) and the distraction caused by other things going on in the work environment, such as background noise (with path coefficients 0.802) and feeling of pressure because meetings take away from work (with path coefficients 0.632) are measured under this head. Moreover, it consumes lot of productive time to effecting work particularly for the complex type of tasks. It may be inferred that the higher degree of willingness to WFH is associated with weakened work environment.

Work life balance is measured using three items. Overall comfort working from home (with path coefficient 0.630), employee’s ability to balance both work and household during the lock down (with path coefficient 0.909) and feeling of difficulty in maintaining work life balance due to the pressure of remaining available all the time (deleted due to low loadings). There is a positive influence of work life balance on employees willingness to WFH in future with regression estimate of 0.546 at p value less than 0.05. It may be inferred that higher degree of work life balance has an incremental effect on willingness to WFH.

Assessment of Reflective Model

Reliability analysis.

Cronbach Alpha was used to assess the inter item consistency between measurement variables. Cronbach’s Alpha for all the factors put together was 0.708. Post factorization, the Cronbach’s Alpha for job performance was 0.750, work dependence was 0.844, work life balance was 0.75, social interaction was 0.64, superior’s role was 0.781 and work environment was 0.66. All these values are above 0.6 indicating acceptable internal consistency (Nunnally, 1978 ). Next, Composite Reliability (CR) was assessed. CR values ranged from 0.753 to 0.865 higher than minimum requirement of 0.7 (see Appendix Table  4 ).

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity was assessed using Average Variance Explained (AVE). The AVE values ranged from 0.533 to 0.684 higher than 0.5 threshold. The factor loadings exceeded 0.5 minimum requirement (Fornell & Larcker, 1981 ). Thus, Convergent Validity was assured.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is assured by comparing the square root of AVE and inter-correlations between other constructs as exhibited in Appendix Table  5 . The diagonal bold numbers in the table indicate square root of AVE and the non-diagonal numbers are the correlations between constructs signifying discriminant validity.

Content Validity

It is very important to take utmost care while designing the questionnaire. The questionnaire was simple in its structure and the language used was easy to understand. This was principally designed to get better content validity.

Structural Model Testing

Hypothesis testing.

In the structural model analysis, multi-dimensional model was hypothesised and tested for significance. While testing the objectives under the study, it was encountered that three out of six path coefficients were considered statistically significant. Work dependence (with path coefficients −0.345), work environment (with path coefficients −0.245), work life balance (with path coefficients 0.546) are significantly related to employee willingness to WFH in future post pandemic. While job performance, social interaction and supervisor’s role are not statistically significant (See Appendix Table  6 ).

As predicted in Hypothesis 2, work dependence is negatively associated with FWFH (β = −0.345, p < 0.05). Hypothesis 5, work environment is negatively associated with FWFH (β = −0.245, p < 0.05). Hypothesis 6, work life balance is negatively associated with FWFH (β = 0.546, p < 0.05). Hypothesis 2, 5 and 6 are supported.

Unexpectedly, Hypothesis 1 that states that there exists a positive influence of job performance on FWFH was not supported. Hypothesis 3, that there is a negative influence of social interaction on FWFH was also not supported. Finally, Hypothesis 4, that there is a positive influence of supervisor’s role on FWFH was also not statistically significant (See Fig. 1 )

Number of variables relating to work infrastructure at home, work dependence, virtual meetings, supervision, performance, social interactions with co-workers, challenges encountered and work life balance were measured in this study (See Fig. 2 ). Based on the availability of work related infrastructure at home during lock down, this part of the survey tries to access the willingness and the future possibility of WFH if required. 82% of respondents confirmed that they are ready to work from home if they are given an opportunity and if such situations demand in future. Moreover, 82% had confirmed that they have internet connection at home, 50% of total respondents confirmed that they have air-conditioning at home, 60% respondents confirmed that they have separate space to work from home, 79% of participants opined that their home office were silent. 87% had computer/laptop/headphones and other accessories required for WFH. This indicates that most of them have access to basic work related infrastructure. It also indicates the future possibility of work from home. 79% of respondents agree that they felt there is a close supervision of work during the lockdown out of which 29% of respondents strongly agreed. This indicates that the amount of supervision over their work has increased comparatively. 76% agreed that they felt that employee engagement is more during the lock down out of which 26% of them strongly agreed. None of them strongly disagreed that employee engagement is more during lockdown.

In perceived organizational support, the survey made an attempt to study the superior’s support towards the team members in addressing various work related problems during the remote working scenario. It has been observed that superiors strongly support their teams when they confront any problems relating to work. Majority of them 83% agreed that they have a very supportive work environment out of which 23% of participants strongly agreed. Moreover, 71% agreed that social interactions were must, whereas 7% denied its importance. However, 21% were neutral.

The social events in virtual offices needs to be adequate to build a sense of community and break the social isolation among the teams. 61% agreed that they had adequate social events with co-workers in virtual office whereas 29% of them were neutral and only 10% of participants complained of not having adequate social events.

With respect to the adequacy of work related meetings, 68% of the participants agreed that the work-related meetings in the virtual office were adequate. This indicates that most of the employees working from home are closely connected through work related meetings. This is a good indicator of building a work relationship even during the lockdown in-spite of physical isolation. Only 5% feel that there are not much adequate interactions in terms of work related team meets as before.

Team meetings are a great way to come together with the colleagues and clients both inside and outside of the organization. The online platforms which are being commonly used in Indian scenario are zoom, google meet, webex, microsoft teams, go to meeting, kaizala and skype other service providers which they agreed to be very effective tools for managing virtual teams. However, it is also observed that certain problems and challenges with respect to internet connectivity, server issues, call drops, hacking and data insecurity during the lockdown were encountered. The study found that 55% of respondents agreed that messaging and chat has improved the team effectiveness. This study has revealed the role of technology in building the virtual workspace. Another problem which has surfaced during the study is the fact that the pressure to be available online all the time has affected the work life balance. 63% of participants agreed that post pandemic also work from home permits should be given. Thus, 63% of employees are comfortable with work from home.

The evidence conferred suggests that WFH is on the whole beneficial to both organizations and its employees. Majority of the respondents agreed to WFH post pandemic with clarity on their performance indicators and enhanced productivity, it can be concluded that WFH during the pandemic is an overall WIN-WIN situation for the employees and the corporate (Garg & van der Rijst, 2015 ). However, home space has become the work area affecting the overall work life balance with long working hours, pressure to be available all the time. In conclusion, the tech problems associated with remote working due to unpreparedness with respect to COVID 19 cataclysm has contributed to the existing challenges of the employees and organizations. It has also been observed that remote working has built a pressure on the home networks which led to frequent interruption in the regular working. Moreover, hacking and data security threats have added to the existing problems. Poor network quality coupled up with frequent call drops, server and connectivity problems are few more issues noticed.

With this, it can be concluded that despite all these challenges faced by the employees the exemplary attitude of employees towards WFH is commendable. It has been observed that majority of respondents have agreed to WFH post lockdown which truly exhibits the spirit to cooperate and abide by the nations call towards adhering to the timely health guidelines without affecting the productivity.

The current seismic circumstances are directing organizations and its employees into a new era of WFH. Employee engagement and supervision coupled alongside supervisor’s support is the only way ahead. Catching up formally and informally through conference calls is the only mode to build teams effectiveness and team inclusion without compromising the productivity and the work enthusiasm is the new reality.

Implications of the Study

The change in the place of working calls for the attention of the labour laws. The Government needs to redefine the existing labour laws in the country. The traditional laws related to workplace requires to be replaced with the changing needs of WFH. This calls for framing of new HR policies in organisations in order to ensure perfect work life balance.

Limitations of Study and Scope for Further Research

Nevertheless, the present study has limitations. The study is limited to a small group of participants of private organizations including young educated working professionals, IT software employees, design engineers, BPO employees and backend support employees working from home. In this study, employees working in essential services and health care were excluded. The recommended future direction for research would be to study using a feasibly larger sample of survey and test the validity. The study is social desirability response bias. Although the anonymity was assured to the respondents there could be a possibility of bias in participation. Social desirability response bias in self report research as pointed out by authors Van de Mortel ( 2008 ) may have transpired. The present study calls for the attention of researchers towards WFH in educational sector and challenges of smart teaching and learning. The impact of WFH and professional isolation on physical and mental well-being should also be further investigated in order to develop preparedness of management during contingencies.

Data Availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.

Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Association for Psychological Science, 16 , 40–68.

Google Scholar  

Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, New Directions, and Lessons for the Study of Modern Work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 , 383–400.

Article   Google Scholar  

Baker, E., Avery, G. C., & Crawford, J. (2007). Satisfaction and perceived productivity when professionals work from home. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 15 (1), 37–62.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin . https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497

Brown, T. A., & Moore, M. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling, 361–379. The Guilford Press.

Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (multivariate applications series) . Taylor & Francis Group.

Crandall, W. R., & Gao, L. (2005). ‘An update on telecommuting: Review and prospects for emerging issues’, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, 70 , 30–37.

De Menezes, L. M., & Kelliher, C. (2011). Flexible working and performance: A systematic review of the evidence for a business case. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13 , 452–474.

Felstead, A., & Henseke, G. (2017). Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, Well-being and Work-life Balance. New Technology, Work and Employment, 32 , 195–212.

Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2010). Why teleworkers are more satisfied with their jobs than are office-based workers: When less contact is beneficial. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38 (4), 336–361.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error . Algebra and statistics.

Gajendran, R., & Harrison, D. (2007). The good, the bad and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (6), 1524–1541.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Garg, A. K., & van der Rijst, J. (2015). The benefits and pitfalls of employees working from home: Study of a private company in South Africa. Corporate Board: Role, Duties and Composition . https://doi.org/10.22495/cbv11i2art3

Golden, T. (2007). Co-workers who telework and the impact on those in the office: Understanding the implications of virtual work for co-worker satisfaction and turnover intentions. Human Relations . https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707084303

Grinter, R. E., Edwards, W. K., Newman, M. W., & Ducheneaut, N. (2005). The work to make a home network work. ECSCW 2005 - Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work.

Hill, E. J., Ferris, M., & Märtinson, V. (2003). Does it matter where you work? A comparison of how three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and personal/family life. Journal of Vocational Behavior . https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00042-3

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods . https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424

Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2009). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of work. Human Relations, 63 , 83–106.

Kumar, A. A., & Shekhar, V. (2020). SCL of knowledge in Indian universities. Journal of the Knowlege Economy, 11 , 1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-019-00592-6

Lautsch, B. A., Kossek, E. E., & Eaton, S. C. (2009). Supervisory approaches and paradoxes in managing telecommuting implementation. Human Relations . https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709104543

Madlock, P. E. (1970). The Influence of Supervisors' Leadership Style On Telecommuters. Journal of Business Strategies, 29 (1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.54155/jbs.29.1.1-24 .

Martínez Sánchez, A., Pérez, M., De Luis Carnicer, P., & Vela Jiménez, M. J. (2007). Teleworking and workplace flexibility: A study of impact on firm performance. Personnel Review, 36 , 42–64.

Mintz-Binder, R., & Allen, P. (2019). Exploring the perspectives of telecommuting nursing faculty. Journal of Nursing Education . https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20190221-05

Nordin, N. N., & Razak, R. A. (2016). Understanding the work at home concept, Its Benefits and Challenges Towards Employees. Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA.: e-Proceeding of the Social Sciences Research ICSSR, 109-118.

Nunnally, J. C. (2008). Psychometric Theory. Michigan: McGraw-Hill series in psychology.701.

Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. In Step by step guide to data analysis using the IBM SPSS program. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.2027c .

Raghuram, S., & Fang, D. (2014). Telecommuting and the role of supervisory power in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-013-9360-x

Raghuram, S., Garud, R., Wiesenfeld, B., & Gupta, V. (2001). Factors contributing to virtual work adjustment. Journal of Management, 27 (3), 383–405.

Russell, H., O’Connell, P. J., & McGinnity, F. (2009). The impact of flexible working arrangements on work-life conflict and work pressure in Ireland. Gender, Work and Organization . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00431

Shamir, B., & Salomon, I. (1985). Work-at-home and the quality of working life. Academy of Management Review . https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4278957

Sims, H. P., Szilagyi, A. D., & Keller, R. T. (1976). The measurements of job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal . https://doi.org/10.2307/255772

Skarpness, B. (1983). On the efficiency of using the sample kurtosis in selecting optimal LP estimators. Communications in Statistics: Simulation and Computation . https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918308812318

Tietze, S., & Musson, G. (2010). Identity, identity work and the experience of working from home. Journal of Management Development . https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711011019288

Van de Mortel, T. F. (2008). Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research. The Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25 (4), 40–48.

Vana, P., Bhat, C. R., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2008, January). On modeling the choices of work-hour arrangement, location, and frequency of telecommuting. In 87th Annual Meeting of the Transport Research Board (TRB), Washington, DC.

Vega, R. P., Anderson, A. J., & Kaplan, S. A. (2014). A within-person examination of the effects of telework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30 , 313–323.

Venkatraman, N., Tanriverdi, H., Stokke, P., Davenport, T., Sproull, L., & Storck, J. (1999). Is it working? Working from home at Statoil, Norway. European Management Journal . https://doi.org/10.1016/s0263-2373(99)00037-7

Vilhelmson, B., & Thulin, E. (2016). Who and where are the flexible workers?, exploring the current diffusion of telework in Sweden. New Technology, Work and Employment, 31 (1), 77–96.

Wheatley, D. (2012). Good to be home? Time-use and satisfaction levels among home-based teleworkers. New Technology, Work and Employment . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00289.x

Windeler, J. B., Chudoba, K. M., & Sundrup, R. Z. (2017). Getting away from them all: Managing exhaustion from social interaction with telework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38 (7), 977–995.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to Prof. V. Shekhar for his continuous guidance for this work.

Code Availability

Not Applicable.

There is no financial assistance for conducting the study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Management, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500 007, India

Centre for Management Studies, ICFAI Law School, ICFAI Foundation for Higher Education (Deemed to be University U/S 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Donthanapally, Shankerpally Road, Hyderabad, Telangana, 501203, India

A. Arun Kumar

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Neha Tunk conceived the idea and A Arun Kumar developed qualitative and quantitative design to undertake the empirical study. A Arun Kumar extracted research paper with high repute, filtered the content based on keywords and generated the concept relevant to the study. A Arun Kumar verified the analytical method and supervised the study. The interviews were conducted by Neha Tunk in English language. A Arun Kumar contributed to the critical revision and final approval of the version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Arun Kumar .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical Statement

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were following the ethical standards of Osmania University’s and The ICFAI Foundation for Higher Education Research Ethics.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Consent to Publication

Additional information, publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix Tables 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 and 6

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tunk, N., Kumar, A.A. Work from home - A new virtual reality. Curr Psychol 42 , 30665–30677 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02660-0

Download citation

Accepted : 21 December 2021

Published : 29 January 2022

Issue Date : December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02660-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Work from home
• Virtual workspace

JEL Classification

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Work From Home: Opportunities And Challenges

As with the emergence of the fourth industrial revolution, the global scientific discourse is marked by the advent of technological revolutions, especially Internet, that has now grown to become a colossal social space, a vital element of which is the nature of this technology and the ways in which it shapes the actual and potential interactions between people. Its revolutionary powers have allowed the people to spare geographic and social distance, even in this tumultuous time of the pandemic.

The world is witnessing the impact of COVID-19 on all facets, in all countries and all industries. Every enterprise has become the target of dwindling revenues even more, because of the lockdown imposed. And as the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread all over the world, mankind’s safest bet has become to work from home.

And, as it has proved work from home does have some benefits:

A company can hire the best regardless of their location, meetings can be done through a digital medium as well. Worried about employees going over on sabbaticals? Guess, that will not be a problem. The time and efforts devoted to the company could be much more than the other scenario.

Although working from home allows people to come back in the business, it does exhibit hard challenges:

• The blurring of the line between personal and professional life: Working from home reduces the geographic division between the workplace and personal space. It also punches a hole right through the calm, safe, and secure mental picturization we have of our homes.
• Distraction: Being drenched in house chores, personal hobbies, and surrounded by the family can really take the target off workers’ eyes. Sticking to schedules, managing their to-do’s can make it really hard for people to focus on work all the time.
• With no co-workers around, working from home can be lonely: Not being able to bounce ideas off co-workers, interact with them, share pleasantries, can be hard for some, and make them feel lonely.
• Lack of interaction affects team building: Lack of interaction can be a detriment to team building, something that builds over conversations at office, lunch, meetings, etc. Working remotely makes it difficult to maintain relationships with co-workers, and communication over Digital channels might not be as effective and it can also be unresponsive. Such circumstances also affect customer-client relationships since approval, approbation, feedbacks cannot be obtained over texts or e-mails.
• Working remotely can mean inconsistent pay: Full-time job guarantees payment at the end of the month regardless, however when working from home during this time, monthly income can be unreliable, and always changing. People can be swamped with work, still, be unpaid.

Whether companies prefer “Work from Home” in the long run, would be based on practical observations, but in this tough time, it surely is the ‘need of the hour’.

Have you read? World’s Best Business Schools . World’s Best Hospitality And Hotel Management Schools . World’s Best Countries For Education System . World’s Best Countries For A Child To Be Born In .

This report/news/ranking/statistics has been prepared only for general guidance on matters of interest and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, CEOWORLD magazine does not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it.

Email Address*

Palomi Gupta

Real-World Solutions Making Capitalism More Equitable

Why leaders need to build emotional resilience to better cope in challenging situations

Minor Surgery, Powerful Reminder

Will you be an AI outsider “company”?

How CEOs Are Thinking About Hybrid Work Today

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Challenges and opportunities of remotely working from home during Covid-19 pandemic

The demand of online remote working from home significantly increased in 2020/21 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. This unforeseen situation has forced individuals and organisations to rapidly train employees and adopt the use of on-line working styles, seeking to maintain the same level of productivity as working from the office. The paper outlines a survey conducted amongst people working from home to identify the challenges and opportunities this change in workstyle offers. At the beginning of the pandemic, many employees faced difficulties adapting to using online tools and combining their working hours with daily routines and family commitments. However, the results show that within a short period of time the respondents had managed to develop the necessary experience and knowledge for digital working utilising tools such as collaboration platforms and video conferencing. A large proportion of respondents recognised the advantage of eliminating travelling time when working remotely from home which also has a positive impact on the environment and CO2 emissions. However, some drawbacks have been identified such as the lack of face-to-face discussion and informal meetings during working days. The Self-Determination Theory is discussed within the context of this paper and it has been found that the theory could provide an explanation of the efficient and rapid adaptation of the technology be employees.

1. Introduction

By the end of March 2020, governments worldwide had decided to take measures to restrict the movement of their population in order to reduce the spread of Covid-19 and maintain or reduce the R-number below 1, where R is the average number of people that one infected person will pass on the virus to. These lockdowns lead to the temporary closure of ‘non-essential’ businesses and forced millions of people worldwide to work from home. In many countries, facilities such as schools, nurseries, universities, commercial organisations, dental clinics, and social venues including restaurants and coffee shops were closed [ 1 ]. This lockdown has forced millions of workers to embrace remote working when possible to do so and made working from home a must rather than an option.

Carroll and Conboy [ 2 ] highlighted the fact that COVID-19 forced organisations into rapid ‘big bang’ sudden adoption of online working from home practices; they draw on the normalisation process theory (NPT) and its underlying components which can be used to understand the dynamics of implementing, embedding, and integrating new technologies and practices into businesses. Matli [ 3 ] presented the results of a survey with main findings indicating that despite the positive characteristics of remote working using on-line technology, there are many negative aspects and risks related to working from home such as unbalanced work overload and pressures to perform timeously, which could affect health and wellbeing due to stress-related issues.

Richter [ 4 ] discussed the implication of the lockdown on digital-work tools for research and practice, illustrating how the lockdown acted as a facilitator for online working. Also, he indicated how the lockdown had a significant impact on people's lives and work practices. However, many employees struggled due to variety of reasons, such as time management and having to work around childcare commitments (when the schools are closed). Other factors also play an important role, such as the need to share computer facilities and internet access at home with other family members, in addition to increased stress from the increase in daily videoconferences. According to Scheiber [ 5 ] Covid-19 pandemic has significantly increased the flexibility of the working hours but has also negatively influenced daily work patterns.

According to Cho [ 6 ]; Covid-19 had a significant impact on the workforce and careers on a global level and it has affected many individuals' vocational behaviours and productivity outcomes. Research conducted on working from home prior to the Covid-19 pandemic found similar difficulties. For example, the work of Park, Fritz and Jex [ 7 ] confirmed that working from home has many drawbacks and may create disruptions, especially amongst those who prefer to working in an office environment and have family commitments and duties. Prior to Covid19, some researchers discussed the advantages and issues in relation to working from home [ [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] ]. The difference between working from home before and after the Covid-19 pandemic is that previously it was an optional measure, but due to Covid-19 it has become a necessity within a very short period of time. Nevertheless, even after Covid-19 restrictions, some organisations have decided to permit or even require their employees to work from home indefinitely. Kramer & Kramer [ 13 ] identified key aspects that are missing from the working from home culture, such as informal face-to-face meetings, the enjoyment of travel and breaking the routine of staying in one place.

Spurka and Straubb [ 14 ] discussed the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on work and careers of individuals within flexible employment relationships; outlining potential impacts of Covid-19 pandemic on the careers of those employees and examining how the pandemic could contribute to the ramification of flexible employment relationships. According to Davison [ 15 ]; the lockdown has required most office workers to fully embrace online remote working and digital work tools such as collaboration platforms and video conferencing tools to enable them to work 100% remotely in new innovative ways. Some recent research has indicated that the lockdown has been found to help specifically in reducing travel and pollution levels with potential positive impacts on global warming and climate change [ 16 ]. According to Richter [ 17 ]; the lockdown has allowed many employees to connect and meet in new ways; and to work more flexibly establishing new forms of management and independent working styles. This has driven many employers to develop their organisational and data management frameworks by using online tools to access resources and data. At the same time, the data security protections requirement has increased significantly during Covid-19 lockdown. A recent study by Ivanti [ 18 ] has found that IT security demands have increased by 66% due to online remote working, with the majority of on-line issues coming from, malicious emails, non-compliant employee behaviour, and software vulnerabilities.

The widely available internet infrastructure and software availability has helped organisations adapt to new working styles, which would have been much more difficult in previous decades [ 17 ]. Modern software, employee's ICT awareness and recent organisational practices have shown inherent flexibility and openness, supporting a wide variety of work practices without the need for technical customisation [ 19 ]. However, it has been argued that if working from home becomes more permanent, organisations will need more sophisticated organisational measures and software to replicate, as far as possible, the ‘in-office’ experience.

Recent publications have also presented significant analysis of Covid19 pandemic and its effect on a wide range of technologies and social aspects. Brem et al. [ 20 ], have discussed the implications of Covid-19 pandemic on innovation, with reflections on several areas that have seen a vast advancement in a short period of time such as e-learning, 3D printing, flexible manufacturing, big data analysis, healthcare technologies, cashless payment and e-commerce. George et al. [ 21 ], have discussed the Covid-19 pandemic on the technology and innovation management research agenda and it has been concluded that the pandemic has changed the way we live and work. Since innovation requires collaboration and communication, their work discussed the effect of the pandemic on innovation when face-to-face meetings are replaced by on-line communication and the challenges of visualisation of innovation and collaboration. The paper highlights the need for further research to better understand the longer term implications of the pandemic on business management. Lee and Trimi [ 22 ] have discussed innovation and the digital age in the Covid-19 pandemic. They have concluded that organisations should depend on their innovation capabilities for survival as sustainable innovation has become key strategy for all types of organisations. Guggenberger et al. [ 23 ], have discussed internet of things (IOT), artificial intelligence (AI) and distributed ledger technology (DLT) to tackle pandemic related challenges; and have presented an overview of the huge potential that can be achieved from these three technologies when utilised in the right way, particularly with the use of open innovation. Giones et al. [ 24 ], have revised the entrepreneurial action in response to Covid-19 pandemic. It has outlined the needed consideration, on individual and organisational levels, that contributes to enhanced resilience. The paper also highlights the need for emotional support to entrepreneurs, during the pandemic and beyond by expanding on the disaster management framework [ 25 ]. Ting et al. [ 26 ], have highlighted the importance of innovation in the medical sector as the world continues to depend on classic public-health measures for dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic; as a wide range of digital technologies can be utilised now to improve the public-health sector and reduce the risk for patients and medical staff, now and beyond Covid-19 pandemic. Arribas-Ibar et al. [ 27 ], discussed the electric vehicles (EVs) sector and its ecosystem; they have argued the possibility that EV ecosystem would be able to benefit from the opportunity provided by the unforseen disruption created by the pandemic.

1.1. The Self-Determination Theory

One of the key theories that needs some attention which could explain the reason why people have adapted very quickly to changes and the use on-line systems during the Covid-19 pandemic is the Self-Determination Theory, shown in Fig. 1 .

The self-determination theory, reproduced from Ref. [ 28 ].

The theory of self-determination [ 28 , 29 ] can offer insights into how employees have been encouraged to embrace the new working style from home and excel in a short period of time. The self-determination theory suggests that individuals are either intrinsically or extrinsically motivated to behave in specific ways [ 30 ]. Intrinsic motivation becomes the dominant driver when an individual wants to perform a certain act for the internal and personal reward or benefit associated with that act [ 30 ] such as in this occasion, maintaining their personal satisfaction and sense of achievement. Extrinsic motivation, however, is related to the desire to perform a specific act for the sake of an external reward or penalty [ 31 , 32 ]. Thus, extrinsic motivation within the parameters of self-determination theory might explain why most employees seek to adopt their work practice from home due to economic persuasion, i.e. keeping their job. Or perhaps for them to feel part of the ‘team’ by working closely with colleagues on-line and even becoming more active in relation to that.

2. Method and hypotheses

An online survey was created at the outset of the UK Covid-19 lockdown and shared online via LinkedIn, Reddit community groups and via direct email. A mixture of multiple-choice quantitative questions and open text qualitative questions were posed. This subsequently set a minimum requirement of access to and a basic familiarisation with online tools and platforms as a pre-requirement for completion. The survey went live 3 weeks after the commencement of the UK lockdown and remained live for a month at which point the data was extracted. Therefore the survey reports on the respondent's early experience and initial familiarisation with home online working and this is consistent with the dates that most changes in remote working occurred in early April according to a related study [ 33 ].

The survey consists of exploratory research, which sought to gain insights into the respondent's adoption and familiarisation to remote methods of working. Three key hypotheses were explored as outlined below:

There is a relationship between the adaptability to working from home with age [ 33 ], highest education level, prior experience of homeworking, device capability, speed of internet connection, software features.

There is a relationship between the adaptability of working from home with related challenges including distractions (childcare, snacking, checking news frequently, risk of redundancy), lack of resources (poor internet, lack of access to necessary documents, lack of printing facilities, lack of suitable space at home, lack of lab facilities, lack of opportunity to be on site to do technical work) and wellbeing concerns (lack of face to face communication, being lonely, lack of physical exercise).

External and home related challenges (such as childcare, poor internet reliability or speed, unhealthy snacking, lack of access to necessary documents, lack of printing facilities, lack of discipline in respect work or family, a lack of informal discussions, a lack of IT support, a lack of suitable space at home, being lonely, checking news frequently, lack of face to face communication, lack of lab facilities, risk of redundancy, lack of physical exercise, lack of opportunity to be on site to get technical work) will result in less enjoyment of home working.

Data was collected from an online survey that was shared across a wide range of online platforms chosen to represent a representative sample including LinkedIn, Reddit UK regional community groups and direct email invitations. The survey was live for a month and was launched 3 weeks into the UK wide lockdown and so reports on early experiences of the transition to working from home.

2.1. Participants

A total of N = 212 respondents completed the survey, representing a 50.5%–49.5% male/female split. Most respondents were UK residents (77.8%), with some responses from other countries (non-UK respondents 22.2%). Although the focus was on the UK, the international participants have provided a wider angle of analysis. This international breakdown was a result of using international forums such as LinkedIn.

The age of respondents was varied but typically within the working age group. The largest group was aged 25–34 (41%), followed by 35–44 (23.16%), 45–54 (17.9%), 18–24 (11.8%) and 55–65 (5.7%). The higher number of respondents aged mid 20's to 40's could partly explain while why childcare issues were so strongly noted as issues relating to home working. As UK schools, pre-schools and nurseries were shut for all children except those of key workers during the time the survey was open. This correlates with the average age of parenthood in England and Wales is 30.4 years for women and 33.3 years for men [ 34 ].

The employment status breakdown of respondents was full time (81.6%), part time (7.1%), self-employment (2.8%) and studying (8.5%). Only economically active respondents are selected and so job seekers or the unemployed were not considered in this survey. Respondents were required to be in a role that permitted working from home for the purposes of the survey and this therefore precluded numerous roles which couldn't be conducted from home. Further to this the survey required completion by those still working throughout the UK lockdown precluding those furloughed due to being in roles that were not financially viable during COVID restrictions and were therefore supported under the financial support measures put in by the UK government, which mirrored those of European neighbours. It is therefore recognised that the demographic data is therefore strongly skewed towards types of employment that was both practically and financially permissible during this period. In this respect the sectors represented by the survey were strongly represented by those in employed in Education (42.5%), Industry (17%), Health and Social Care (9.9%), Civil Service (7.5%) and Commercial and Trading (7.1%), with others at less than 5% as shown in Fig. 2 . Therefore, the demographics had a high percentage of respondents with graduate (28.8%) and postgraduate (49%) qualifications.

Percentage of respondents by work sector.

2.2. Measures

Respondents were asked a range of questions pertaining to their working at home experience both prior to and during the Covid-19 pandemic. A total of 22 questions were asked, the first 6 being demographic followed by 15 multiple choice questions each including an ‘other’ option for an open response to capture any additional responses, 11 of these accepted only a single response, whilst four questions permitted multiple response options these questions related to the type of software used, the reasons for the use of the software and the main challenges of working from home and the main benefits. All these questions were reported and analysed as quantitative research, with the key findings reported for each individual question and further statistical analysis employed to permit inferential analysis across a range of questions to test the five key hypotheses.

The final questions were optional and permitted respondents in an open-ended text-based response at the end for any further comments or feelings in relation to homeworking because of COVID. These was analysed qualitatively using thematic analysis to capture key insights that will be discussed separately at the end of the findings section.

The reporting of these results will be split into the representative quantitative results from each question, the qualitative open response question, and the inferential analysis results from comparing across question types to determine responses more specifically to the research questions.

3.1. Individual question responses

Prior to the COVID pandemic just over half (55.7%) of the respondents had experience of home or remote working compared to 45.3% who didn't. However when asked about their prior experience of using on-line conferencing from home it was 45.7% having experience, always (4.2%), frequently (16%), sometimes (25.5%), compared to 24.1% who had never and 30.2% who had rarely ever used on-line conferencing from home. This suggests that whilst working from home was occurring previously, the type of work that was typically conducted did not require engagement with others. Conversely when asking the same question regarding online conferencing at home but during the Covid-19 restrictions the responses indicated that 51.4% always, 28.8% frequently and 11.8% sometimes use online conferencing at home compared to only 5.7% that rarely or 2.4% that never use it. This suggests that it is not just the location of work, but the type and function of work that has changed significantly as well.

When asked whether they thought that working online from home would achieve the same outcomes as working onsite, 83% overall felt it did with the breakdown being 13.7% for always, 41.5% for often and 27.8% for sometimes achieving the same outcomes, 2.4% didn't know and the remaining was split between rarely or never. This indicates that the general consensus was that the respondents felt that it would be feasible to continue.

When asked about their software use for communicating through remote working, respondents were permitted multiple choices. The software with the highest usage was MS Teams (58%) as shown in Fig. 3 .

Software use for communicating during remote home working.

The vast majority of respondents (80.7%) indicated that their software use was dictated by their employers as being the preference/approved software. Whilst, secondary factors were noted by far fewer respondents such as availability (33.5%), experience (19.5%) and Software Features and capabilities (18.9%) (see Fig. 4 ).

Software preference reason.

When asked about how challenging they found it working at home in their first week due to Covid-19 work closures 12.6% of respondents stated that it is been very difficult, 34.4% of respondents found it difficult. Whilst 25.7% said this was a normal situation and 16.4% and 10.9% of participants stated that they found it easy or very easy respectively. This question was then repeated for their current experience compared to the first week of enforced working from home which would between 3 and 7 weeks experience after the start of lockdown depending on how quickly they completed the survey. Following up, 41.5% of respondents stated that they had got used to working from home finding it slightly better and easier, whilst 26.8% of respondents found the situation much better when compared to the first week. However, 19.1% and 12.6% of participants have still found this situation as challenging or getting more difficult respectively.

Respondents were also asked how long it took them to adapt to working from home following Covid-19, 34.9% stated they adapted themselves to work from home immediately from day one, whilst for 29.2% it took a several days, 14.2% a week, 13.2% two weeks 1.9% a month and 6.6% stated they had never adjusted to working from home.

Respondents were asked about the main challenges of working from home during Covid-19, which permitted multiple responses. The greatest challenge (43%) was lack of face to face communication or lack of eye contact whilst 10.4% of respondents considered the risk of redundancy or additional workload as a challenge. The full list of challenges are shown in Fig. 5 , interestingly overall the lack of social face to face interaction featured in the three of the highest four scoring challenges alongside a lack of exercise.

Main challenges of working from home during Covid-19 for each variable.

When asked about the benefits of working from home during Covid-19, respondents were given the opportunity to select multiple responses. Respondents almost universally noted reduced travel time (82%), followed by reduced costs related to travel and subsistence (60%) whilst the lowest number of respondents reported familiarity with the technology and IT (22.2%) as shown in Fig. 6 .

Main benefits of working from home during Covid-19 situation.

Respondents were asked whether their work type would permit them to continue to work from home after the Covid-19 restrictions had completely eased. The highest number (31.6%) suggested that their work may sometimes permit working from home, followed by 19.8% who felt that they would often be able to work from home and 11.3% who felt they could always work from home. Contrastingly, 9% stated that their type of work would rarely permit working from home and 9.4% stated that their type of work would never permit working from home. Interestingly 18.9% were unsure stating ‘I don't know’. Respondents were then asked if given the choice, how often they would prefer to work from home after COVID-19, over three quarters stated a preference to, with 34% and 32.5% of respondents stating that they would prefer to work from home sometimes and often respectively if allowed and 10.4% always. However, conversely 12.3% respondents stated they would rarely wish to work from home, 6.6% never and 4.2% didn't know their preference for working at home once the Covid-19 restrictions are fully lifted.

When respondents were asked whether they felt working from home achieved the same outcomes as working onsite 41.5% indicated that they felt that working from home will often, 27.8% sometimes and 13.7% always achieve the same outcomes. Whilst 8.5% felt rarely and 6.1% felt it never achieves the same outcomes whilst 2.4% of respondents didn't know.

When asked about whether they felt isolated working at home, 9.4% answered always, 21.7% often and 31.1% sometimes felt isolated when working from home. However, 23.1% and 14.2% of respondents stated that they rarely and never feel isolated when working from home.

When asked about their general opinion of working from home respondents were largely positive with 32.5% and 20.3% of respondents stating or they enjoy and enjoy very much working from home respectively and 24.1% of respondents stated they were neutral. Whilst only 14.6% and 8.5% of participants said they feel slightly dislike and dislike it respectively.

3.2. Qualitative response

The survey included the opportunity for respondents to provide an open text responses at the end provide personal experience in the form of comments of feelings about their experience.. From these comments it would appears that overtime these respondents had largely adapted to the challenges of working from home during Covid-19 as indicated below:

“The experience has been challenging but gradually getting the grip of it”.

In relation to the challenges, one of the respondents also stated that:

“Admin staff seems to be sending too many emails perhaps to show, that, they are working from home”.

This could reflect the psychology of some employees who would feel that it is a privilege to be working from home and they need to show their line managers that they are working as usual. In a traditional office based environment, being in the office is sufficient to evident their work, but being away, they might feel the need to over communicate with colleagues.

Another reasons could be related to the lack of phone calls or informal face-to-face discussions:

“My main thought is that working from home can be more inefficient as being at work. Face to face discussions are quicker and more informed than video call meetings. The decision-making process is slowed down, and communications are slower and more basic”.

“Poor communication, meaning if you're not present in office discussions or certain online meetings or group calls things are often missed or you're out of the loop”.

Another respondent indicated several challenges to working from home stating:

“Working from home loses team spirit and accuracy of work. Also, the face to face team interaction is missing with too many distractions despite the efficiency”.

This comment summarises some of the quantitative feedback we received which implied distraction could be related to family commitments or distraction from a change in work communication methods such as too many emails due to a lack of informal face-to-face discussions.

Another respondent commented on the difficulties of time management stating:

“Think the main problem with working from home is the lack of boundaries. This can be personal, such as the boundary to stop doing something and relax because you don't feel as if you have been as productive to deserve a break or it could be family members not being considerate to needs such as interrupting study sessions”.

People who live alone might feel lonely during lockdown, even if they are working from home. For example, one respondent stated:

“As I live on my own, I find one of the most difficult things to be lack of motivation, there is no one here to motivate me or support me. For example, getting up/out of bed and getting work done”.

This suggests that on-line conferencing might not have the same personal and psychological effect as face-to-face meetings. Another respondent indicated similar feedback in relation to transportation stating:

“I think working from home might be nice for people with commutes or family! I live alone and walking to work is nice exercise for me, so I miss it! It's also easier to work on projects if everyone's available for a quick chat face to face”.

Other employees feel that by working from home, they are helping their own employers but risking work-life balance; for example, one respondent stated:

“Working from home definitely helps the company but managing work life & balance should be important”.

So, the balance between social life, family life and work should be well organised to avoid unnecessary stress. Another respondent stated that:

“From my personal point of view, the work environment in the institutions gives a more formal feeling, time restrictions and commitment”.

This indicates it is easier to manage work-life balance when working away from home and enhances time management.

There were specific challenges for people who started their new job just before lockdown. For example, one respondent stated:

“I recently moved to a new project and new team, so my working remotely is not productive. I don't realize the scope of the work because I am new to the project. Other engineers are more productive than me because they have dealt with project issues. I am unlucky because Covid-19 comes at the time I moved to a new project and joining new team”.

Hence, special arrangements may be needed for new employees to support them in integrating into their new on-line work environment.

Another challenge which most families face is childcare as indicated by one of the respondents:

“Full time job and full time childcare, very challenging”.

This could be one of the main challenges whilst schools are closed. However, this challenge will have been less important once the schools or nurseries reopened.

Reduced transportation was reflected quantitatively as well as qualitatively by respondents’ comments. One respondent stated:

“Normally I work away from home in London 3 days a week. I didn't realize how stressful this was until I was working from home all the time. My mental health feels better because of it and I have more time to order my life. I've heard similar things from other people”.

“This event [Covid-19 Pandemic] has shown us that a lot of jobs can be done at home or can be partially done at home. This is good for the environment chiefly - less travel, electricity spent etc. - but also good for business as this means less unimportant meetings. I appreciate being able to work based on my sleeping pattern, not based only on traditional Victorian factory work schedules”.

Hence, the respondents seem to be positive about the environmental aspects and the elimination of daily commute.

Some types of work can be done from home without being affected by Covid-19 such as computer programming as indicated by one of the respondents:

“I do software development, so the work wasn't difficult to switch over to working from home. It is mainly the self-discipline to not step away from the computer and do something else and the fact how I'm sat at the computer for the entire day rarely leaving my room for both work and out of work hours”.

But the same statement indicated major issues to consider such as mental and physical health of not leaving the room or the desk for long hours. Other business might not have the same flexibility such as the service and hospitality industries as indicated by one of the respondents:

“Hospitality is a face-face business. My working from home has mainly been looking after the financials of the company but can be hard for a small business with cash handling.”

One of the issues that should be considered is the health and safety and the ergonomic considerations from working for a long time using unsuitable furniture in makeshift home working environments as indicated:

“Time off work isn't enough to actually feel relaxed in my home at the minute, set up my work laptop at a desk in my bedroom (so my sleep has suffered) with a cheap chair but usually have an ergonomic one at work. My back is killing but daren't go to the doctor for pain relief”.

“I had a few days of intermittent internet. I don't have a desk. I'm working in the same room as my son, which is very awkward if we both have meetings. Aside from that I don't miss public transport, I am saving loads of money, but just want my social life and exercise back and a desk with a couple of monitors instead of sitting cross-legged on the sofa with a laptop”.

This statement highlights the need for suitable internet infrastructure and a suitable computer workstation for safe use over long hours.

Reflecting on the long-term situation, hybrid working options where considered preferable, with considerations of the optimal ratio:

“I used to work from home 20% of the week (one day) I would like to return to work with the opposite proportion, work from home 80% and go into the office one day a week. That would be perfect for me”.

For some employees, the implications of the pandemic restrictions did not affect their working pattern much:

“I have been a homeworker since October 2019, so nothing has changed with regards to covid-19 for me”.

This suggests that a few business and employees were already in a good position to address the Covid-19 challenges due to a pre-existing flexible working culture.

3.3. Inferential analysis

A range of statistical analysis methods including multiple regression models were employed to test the validity of the three stated hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: It is hypothesised that there is a relationship between the adaptability (to working from home) with age, highest education level, prior experience of homeworking, device capability, speed of internet connection, software features.

A multiple regression was run to predict the adaptability to working from home from variables of age, highest education level, prior experience of homeworking, device capability, speed of internet connection and software features. Among these variables, only variables of age (β = .13, p < .05) and previous experience of working from home (β = 0.27, p < .001) statistically significantly predicted the adaptability of working from home, F (6, 205) = 4.438, p < .001 and explained 11.5% of the variance. All other variables were not statistically significant to the prediction. This result suggests that as workers get older, they will find it easier to adapt to working from home and prior experience of working from home will also lead to more adaptability to working from home in Covid-19 situations. This finding on age is contrary to the cited literature [ 33 ], but perhaps in respect to the unique conditions of COVID is explained by the additional difficulties of caring for younger children that would be less of a challenge to older workers who would likely have older children.

Hypothesis 2: It is hypothesised that there is a relationship between adaptability to working from home with challenges (childcare, poor internet, snacking, lack of access to necessary documents, lack of printing facilities, lack of suitable space at home, being lonely, checking news frequently, lack of face to face communication, lack of lab facilities, risk of redundancy, lack of physical exercise, lack of opportunity to be on site to do technical work.)

To address this question, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the prediction of the adaptability to working from home from the formally mentioned challenges. The result of the multiple linear regression analysis revealed that among the challenges listed above there is a statistically significant association between childcare (β = −.14, p < .05), lack of access to necessary documents (β = −0.17, p < .05), lack of face to face communication and eye contact (β = −0.18, p < .05), lack of physical exercising during the day (β = −0.19, p < .01) and the adaptability to working from home, F(15, 196) = 3.119, p < .001 and these factors explained 19.3% of the variance. These findings suggest that these four challenges have a significant contribution to predict the adaptability to working from home. In other words, as concerns increase regarding a lack of access to child care, not having access to necessary documentation, a lack of face to face communication and a lack of exercise, these will lead to a reduced satisfaction in working from home and therefore, the adaptability to working from home significantly decreases.

Hypothesis 3: It is hypothesised that greater challenges (childcare, poor internet, snacking, lack of access to necessary documents, lack of printing facilities, lack of discipline to respect work or family, lack of informal discussions, lack of IT support, lack of suitable space at home, being lonely, checking news frequently, lack of face to face communication, lack of lab facilities, risk of redundancy, lack of physical exercise, lack of opportunity to be on site to get technical work) will result in less enjoyment of home working.

A multiple regression analysis was performed to predict the enjoyment of working from home in relation to the listed challenges. Among the listed challenges, the variables of; lack of discipline to respect work or family hours (β = −0.16, p < .05), lack of face to face communication and eye contact (β = −0.20, p = .005) and lack of physical exercise during the day (β = −0.16, p < .05) statistically significantly predicted the enjoyment of working from home, F (15, 196) = 2.329, p = .004 and explained 15.1% of the variance. All other variables noted above were not statistically significant to the prediction. Therefore, this result suggests that, as concerns increase in relation to these three challenges the enjoyment of working from home will decrease accordingly.

4. Discussions

4.1. practical implications.

Reflecting on the data, it is evident that employers and employees are adapting to the culture of working from home when possible. There are several pros and cons from working from home during Covid-19. The main advantage was a lack of travelling time and reduced transportation costs. The issues identified were a lack of social activities, of face-to-face meetings and informal discussion. Being lonely at home was also identified as a negative point. A hospital radiologist, who would normally work in the hospital prior to Covid19, gave interesting feedback to the survey:

“In order for the hospital to reduce infection and density of employees due to Covid19, I started working from home using the right computer, monitor and software to provide reporting on scans of patients. This was rarely done in the past and I discovered that I only need to be physically at the hospital for only one day a week and for four days I could provide the medical reporting from home”.

A university academic has pointed out that on-line meetings provided an excellent tool to share documents and work on projects with several people with reduced travelling time and higher productivity. An industrial employee reported that on-line working styles are not suitable for hands-on work and only limited days of the month can work be done at home for activities such as writing reports of field visits. Parents who are employees or students with young children reported difficulties in utilising the working hours during the day when nurseries and schools are closed, this is one of the main issues cited relating to reduced productivity and perhaps an increase in stress. One of the advantages of working remotely is that people have learnt new software and presentation skills, and this could enable permanent culture change in organisations. Other people reported the lack of a healthy office desk and space to allow healthy working conditions, but reports have shown that some employers are providing office furniture or allowing employees to take their office facilities home with them. The self-determination theory is useful in exploring the reasons for how people managed to adjust and adapt to the rapidly to the conditions for working from home. This applies from the intrinsic motivation such as the feeling of self-satisfaction and the enjoyment of being able to continue with their work activities on-line with other people, and the ability to have some normality and continuity through their work. However, a key extrinsic driver and motivation is also likely to be of maintaining employment and income during these difficult and uncertain times, although this could link to the intrinsic motivation of the ability to feel in control of something in challenging times. In normal circumstances employees would need to, or request, training to be able to use software such as MS Teams or Zoom. However with the pandemic, it is evident that people have learnt the technology in a short period of time; simply stated it has shown that necessity is the mother of invention.

4.2. Implications of theory

There are many theories that could be reflected upon in literature, that would explain or guide individuals or organisations in relation to innovation or technology adaptation. Disaster management framework [ 25 ] could be a key theory to provide a strategy and plan in times of disaster, such as Covid-19 pandemic, to effectively manage the situation. The theory indicated that the formalisation of a performance management system during crisis management and creating key performance indicators are critical to monitor productivity and performance. Also having procedures for knowledge management and knowledge sharing, particularly during working from home, is critical for the survival of the organisation during crisis. One of the innovation theories, such as Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), indicates that adopter's attitude and expectations of the innovation influence the likelihood for its adoption [ 35 ]. In this research, it was evident that due to the pandemic, the technology acceptance (e.g. using on-line conference software) was much faster than the norm and this acceptance is related to people having no other options due to the pandemic (self-isolation or general lockdown). A similar theory to reflect this is Rogers' Innovation Diffusion Theory [ 36 ], which provides a general theory about what could influence an individual's choices about an innovation in normal situations. But due to the unforeseen situation of Covid-19 pandemic, the self-determination theory, developed by Ryan and Deci [ 28 ] could provide an explanation of why people have rapidly adopted on global level the innovative technologies, particularly in relation to working from home. The intrinsic motivation such as the enjoyment and the satisfaction of working from home, combined with the extrinsic motivation such as sustaining employability could explain the global attitude of employees as they are looking at the digital technology as the ‘survival kit’ or ‘necessity’; rather than an optional choice as most innovation adaptation theories address. Also the penalty of non-adopting could be costly such as indicating incompetency and lack of control.

4.3. Limitations and further work

This survey opened after the first 3 weeks of the UK lockdown gathering responses for a month and as such collected important early data that was beneficial in enabling a comparison of the respondent's adaptation to remote home working modes. The intention of this study was to capture these early reflections and experiences upon the initial difficulties in adapting to the new modes of remote working. As such this survey presents only a snapshot of the respondents experience at this time, a longitudinal study would be able to address the longer term experiences in relation to settling into a routine of home working and measuring the effects that schools readmitting pupils once the lockdown restrictions were eased would have. Additionally, this study does not consider the longer term effects of a working from home malaise that may have developed over the many months that followed. . Furthermore, future studies could consider also specific wellbeing considerations associated with remote and homeworking and the impact on their adaptability and enjoyment of remote working. These could include a consideration of human factors drawing information on the spaces being used for home working and any adaptations required and ergonomic considerations to give insights into how employers could better support employees remote working in the future. Another aspect for consideration could have been gathering data on the total number of hours worked per week and what the overall picture of the working day looked like during COVID restrictions with the lack of a necessity to conform to traditional 9-5 day and the additional concerns of juggling home life pressures such as schooling and potentially the need to avoid peak usage internet times to minimise bandwidth restrictions. Furthermore consideration of the mental tool of homeworking through loneliness and isolation and the impact that this has on working relationships over time could also be considered in combination with the above in relation to the impact on adaptability, enjoyment and the long term success factors for home working.

5. Conclusions

This study was conducted at the beginning of Covid-19 pandemic to identify opportunities and challenges of working from home. An on-line survey was conducted to capture the information and gather feedback from the public. The results show that the main challenges are of a psychological nature such as being lonely and lack of daily face-to-face discussions and informal meetings. While a lack of physical activities in and the challenges of key factors such as childcare and workload management has been also identified. The main advantages of remote working were reduced travel time and cost which has made people more productive, but has prevented effective work-home life boundaries being maintained for some. As human beings, we are social animals and it will be difficult to continue working from home without this social aspect during or after working hours. The family situation is found to be an influencing factor on the suitability of working from home, particularly with the closure of nurseries and schools. Several theories could explain the rapid adaptation of the technologies and the culture of working from home, but learning the tools to work remotely could be considered the ‘survival kit’ and necessity that required full adaptation in a very short period of time. The internet infrastructure in some regions and countries will need to be improved to allow the required bandwidth for comfortable online video conferencing without delays in the video or audio signals. The Covid-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to understand the potential for enhanced remote working, and at-distance teaching, with greater potential for future developments to allow for international collaboration and cross-border employment in the future.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Amin Al-Habaibeh: Supervision, Investigation, Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, VisualizationVisuali. Matthew Watkins: Validation, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, VisualizationVisuali. Kafel Waried: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Validation, Writing – original draft. Maryam Bathaei Javareshk: Mathematical modelling, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis.

In the fast-changing world of business, Fortune ‘cuts through the noise’

Good morning. It’s been almost a decade since I started writing this daily newsletter, and it will be two more weeks before I stop. So bear with me over the next fortnight as I offer a few final thoughts.

The business world has changed dramatically in the last decade. The technology transformation is well documented elsewhere. But what I’ve found from countless roundtable discussions with CEOs is that conversations purportedly about technology very quickly devolve into conversations about people. How do I lead in this period of unprecedented change? How do I get my team to embrace the transformational potential of technology rather than resist it? How do I push responsibility and decision making to the edge—essential to cope with rapid change—while ensuring my employees are engaged, inspired and aligned with the company’s mission and values as they drive the business forward?

In CEO Daily, and at Fortune more broadly, we have tried to help leaders answer those questions. Our reporting, our storytelling, our benchmarking, and our convening are all intended to serve the same goal: to make business better. How well we succeed is left for others to judge. But I have asked a few CEOs to take a stab at the question: What makes Fortune important and relevant to you in today’s world? I’ll share their responses over the next two weeks. A few to start:

“Fortune is critical to the business world, not just chronicling vast movements, but steering thought leadership and innovation. In an era where disinformation is abundant and wisdom is scarce, Fortune distinguishes itself by not only reporting on the global economic landscape, but by providing the very insights that shape it.”

— Albert Bourla, CEO, Pfizer

“ In a business news environment largely defined by headlines and sound bites, Fortune provides deep insight and sharp perspectives to explain today’s challenges so we can better anticipate tomorrow’s opportunities… [It] cuts through the noise to make sense of what matters in business.”

— Karen Lynch, CEO, CVS Health

“ Business leaders today must be comfortable adapting to uncertainty and rapid change. Fortune is a trusted resource when it comes to navigating that change, with timely insights, rich storytelling, and rigorous rankings to hold company accountable. I admire their commitment to not only report on the state of business, but to make business better for generations to come.”

— Ed Bastian, CEO, Delta Air Lines

More to come. News below.

Alan Murray @alansmurray [email protected]

Exposed foundations

Elon Musk’s tunneling startup, the Boring Company, forced a temporary halt to Las Vegas’s monorail last June after workers exposed the foundations of two support pillars. The issue was quickly resolved, but Boring workers exposed the base of another pillar in October. Fortune has previously reported on unsafe working conditions at the Boring Company’s worksites. Fortune

The end of GE’s leadership academy

GE has sold its Crotonville management training academy just outside of New York City. The company opened the 60-acre campus in 1956, but GE Aerospace CEO Larry Culp now says the campus doesn’t make sense after GE’s split into three separate firms. Other companies, like Boeing and 3M, are hoping to sell their leadership retreats, preferring instead to host training over videoconferencing software or at external hotels. The Wall Street Journal

Apple’s slump

Apple has lost its crown as the globe's top smartphone brand after sales slumped early this year. Samsung was the top seller of smartphones in the first quarter of 2024 with 20.8% market share, according to research firm IDC; Apple had 17.3%, ahead of Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi's 14.1%. Apple faces fierce domestic competition in China, one of its most important overseas markets, from brands like Huawei and Honor. Reuters

AROUND THE WATERCOOLER

Boeing’s CEO search has a new front-runner—and insiders say it could mean a radical change for the $104 billion ailing planemaker by Shawn Tully

Founder of Toms shoes went on a men’s retreat with other entrepreneurs to combat his loneliness and depression: ‘I lost a lot of my clear meaning and purpose’ by Alexa Mikhail 

The ‘Oracle of Wall Street’ expands on why the ‘crisis of the American male’ will send home prices crashing 30%: Gaming, rampant loneliness, and not enough single women homebuyers by Alena Botros

The steep pay gap between the U.S. and U.K. is real—just look at how much Exxon Mobil and Chevron chiefs make compared with those at Shell and BP by Prarthana Prakash

Commentary: America is the undisputed world leader in quantum computing even though China spends 8x more on the technology–but an own goal could soon erode U.S. dominance by Jungsang Kim and Christopher Monroe

The Great Resignation is effectively over. We’re now in the Great Talent Stagnation, where employers’ biggest concern is the lack of qualified applicants by Jane Thier

T his edition of CEO Daily was curated by Nicholas Gordon. 

This is the web version of CEO Daily, a newsletter of must-read insights from Fortune CEO Alan Murray. Sign up to get it delivered free to your inbox.

Latest in Newsletters

• 0 minutes ago

The EEOC’s enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is a rare common-sense win for abortion rights

One company’s 4-day workweek experiment increased productivity by 24% and cut burnout in half

TikTok has repeatedly said that it’s no longer linked to China. A new Fortune investigation tells a more complicated story.

JPMorgan and other big banks leading on AI ‘are really doubling down.’ Is it too late for competitors to catch up?

Jobs of the future will require the ‘cognitive skills’ AI hasn’t mastered, says Accenture’s chief AI officer

U.S. House votes to drastically expand Section 702 surveillance program rather than reining it in

Most popular.

Some ex-TikTok employees say the social media service worked closely with its China-based parent despite claims of independence

Founder of Toms shoes went on a men’s retreat with other entrepreneurs to combat his loneliness and depression: ‘I lost a lot of my clear meaning and purpose’

Apple loses its spot as the world’s top seller of smartphones after tough China competition from brands like Xiaomi and Huawei

The tax code is made for tradwives. Here’s how much it punishes dual-earning couples

Nike’s boss says remote work was hurting innovation, so the company realigned and is ‘ruthlessly’ focused on building a disruptive pipeline

Bill Gates unloaded one of his properties in less than two weeks on the market—and it only cost $5 million