Monthly Archives: January 2013

They need to see you there to know that you are working… Not!

Posted on by
Reply

Any knowledge workers here ever pretend to work? Perhaps you’ve squinted your eyes to feign concentration as you gaze at that document you’re working on and, all the while, thought about what you’re going to have for dinner. People around you just tended to assume you’re working right? If pretending to work is new to you, head on over to Google and search “how to pretend to work” or “how to look busy at work” and you will find that some people have it down to a science. How did we ever get here? You can gain an understanding about the problem of measuring knowledge work productivity by reading GSA Enterprise Transformation’s Knowledge Worker Productivity: Challenges, Issues, Solutions (click to download).  As of the year 2011, the author explains (pp. 2-3):

… there is little movement in the research or application field of how to measure knowledge worker productivity and from there improve it. This gap arises partly because knowledge work is intangible and difficult to categorize in subgroups and partly because the existing productivity measures and performance review systems are rooted in ‘machine age’ organizations that are much more product and service oriented.

So, for example, it is easy to quantitatively measure the number of cookies that are boxed on a production line by a particular worker, or whether salespeople meet their sales targets, and in many of these instances the objective quantitative measure can be backed up by a subjective quantitative measure for example customer satisfaction scores.

It is much less easy to measure productivity that may have a quantitative output but which depends on knowledge worker input – a policy paper is a case in point. In this instance the process for getting to the policy paper is not reliably measurable in quantitative terms. It would be difficult to know whether a policy paper that took ten weeks to write was ‘better’ that[sic] one that took five weeks to write because the speed of the writing depends on the skills, knowledge, and experience of the writer.

… Looking for organizational best practice in measuring knowledge worker productivity does not yield much. There are surprisingly few studies on measuring productivity in the administrative knowledge-intensive services of large public organizations.

When I first encountered this paper I was shocked and outraged at how little has been accomplished to establish appropriate protocol for accurately assessing knowledge worker productivity. The next time I heard the words, “They need to see you there to know that you are working,” I responded, “During all my years of post-secondary schooling I’ve gone home from class without any professors coming home with me to make sure I’m working on my assignments. I’ve completed my assignments on my own, turned them in, and earned my A’s. Why does someone now need to see me in order to know that I’m working?” A long pause followed, and then he answered, “I don’t know.” Why indeed?

That’s not all. Allow me to also draw your attention to their findings on manager effectiveness (p. 4):

Managers who do not have the capability to performance manage remote workers are not likely to have the capability to performance manage on-site workers. Indeed, as the graphic [on page 4] shows manager effectiveness at performance review delivery is, across the board, rather weak.

What this means is that a manager who is not able to measure performance by results (which management of remote workers demands) will similarly not be able to objectively assess the performance of on-site employees. In this case, such managers rely upon subjective interpretations of what it means to be working (e.g., arriving to work on time and not leaving until the work-shift has ended). Thoughts on any of this?

See my follow-up post, A Looking Busy Coach! Plus, Who Pretends to Work and Why?.

The Happy Workplace: Reflection on a Presentation about Zappos’ Company Culture

Posted on by
2
A couple of days ago I attended a presentation by Zappos’ CEO, James Key Lim, in Sacramento, California. Lim spent an hour talking about the decision to turn things around at Zappos several years ago by developing and prioritizing a strong work culture of happiness that values transparency, trust, social connections, and fun (e.g., they have toys and games at work). Company culture is the #1 concern there as Lim emphasized over and over again. Unfortunately I didn’t hear or even find anything later about their take on job design and person-job fit as I hoped, however the Zappos philosophy on hiring as well as information on the hiring process itself can be found on YouTube.

In his presentation, Lim also expressed support for telework though their company places importance on face-to-face interaction and real world connections such that he couldn’t see having a virtual workforce to the extent that I know other organizations have (IBM and Cisco). However, since Zappos is about delivering direct customer service and thus people dealing directly with people, I can see why he sees it as necessary for his employees to be physically present – so that they can have fun together and help “transmit” happiness to each other which then gets passed on to their customers. Jobs in customer service are more attractive to people with highly extroverted tendencies anyway, so it is fitting that they first tailored the culture to their current employees’ needs and then subsequently select future employees on the basis of how well they contribute to the company culture. Fortunately, you don’t have to pay $45 to learn about Zappos’ development of a work culture that values happiness as I did. Much of what James Key Lim said has also been stated by a previous corporate executive, Tony Hsieh, in the following videos:

Lim also presented this music video that Zappos’ employees participated in. It shows just how much they encourage fun and silliness there.

It’s refreshing to see organization leaders try something different to make the work environment more palatable to its employees. If I were to ask myself if I’d be a great fit for Zappos however, I’d say, “Probably not!” I’m very introverted and very much a “lone wolf.” I have much lower need for affiliation than these folks and a much higher need for personal space. I value solitary work and the peace and quiet I need to get it done. (Yes, it’s very challenging to be this way in a world that tends to expect women to be sociable, agreeable, and group-oriented. And, by the way, this post titled “Leave Loners Alone” by psychotherapist Wayne C. Allen explains variation in need for external stimulation beautifully.) My point is that it’s very hard to come up with a work arrangement that pleases everyone.

This brings me to an observation I’ve made with regard to some disagreement I’ve witnessed between telework critics and telework advocates. I don’t expect the emergence of a cyber-utopia and recognize that a work anywhere-anytime system will present some problems just as every other work system had. We can go on and on ad nauseam about the many problems and difficulties presented during our hunting and gathering days, farming during the Agrarian Age, or working in centralized locations during the Industrial Age. I see growing indication of the Industrial work system becoming unsustainable and recognize an Information Age work system as being the better deal. I haven’t found any great videos that depict the worst rush hour traffic jams (because does anyone really want to take the time to record one?). However, this last video has made its way around. It shows how having everyone use the same routes to go to the same cities to work the same shifts goes against the notion of productivity, especially in an increasingly 24/7 business environment, due to the wasted time and stress that crowding creates. Furthermore, whether by rail or on the freeway, this is occurring in many major cities in the world.

International and Cultural Trends in Telework Receptivity

Posted on by
2

Upon first receiving Future Work: How Businesses Can Adapt and Thrive in the New World of Work, by Alison Maitland and Peter Thomson, I was a bit disappointed to see how skinny it was. After diving into it however, I realized that the information here is more about quality rather than quantity. In this book, Maitland and Thomson answered some lingering questions I had that I couldn’t seem to find answers to elsewhere. Are there any attempts to measure employee sentiment about telework internationally? Which countries and/or cultures are more receptive to a work anywhere-anytime system? Which aren’t?

Future Work

It turns out that there are attempts to assess employees’ opinions as well as to parse out cultural aspects of various nations and organizations facilitating a remote work system. Consider the following points:

  •  According to Cisco Systems’ international survey of employees’ expectations, 60% of people believe they don’t need to work in an office in order to be productive, and this perspective is strongest in India, China, and Brazil (p. 80)
  • With respect to a shift to future working styles, Gonnie Been, manager of corporate communications and social innovation at Microsoft, states that northern Europe is generally more accepting than southern Europe; resistance in the United States (where there is a culture of “presenteeism” or long hours) is also noted (p. 83, p. 103)
  • Organizations open to innovating work styles (e.g., remote working) place value on creativity, trust, and self-motivation (p. 95)
  • In comparing nations with advanced economies, Caroline Waters, director of people and policy at BT, states: the UK is furthest along in terms of workplace flexibility; the U.S. doesn’t have as sophisticated of a model as the U.K. while Germany’s tax legislation is largely prohibitive; France “hasn’t had great take-up nationally” with unions focusing on working week length instead of when and how people want to work. However, she sees the situation changing for these latter nations with more understanding of possibilities introduced by flexibility (p. 103-104).

The take-away message here is that the rate at which future work styles are adopted depends a lot on national cultural norms and that organizations are taking notice of the larger trends in employee sentiment at both national and international levels. Thus, our opinions are important. As I’ve talked about this subject with various people, I’ve come to realize that there are many out there who haven’t yet realized that this possibility exists. Consider the benefits. If the possibility of moving towards a remote work system is important to you, make sure to talk about it with others.

Office Robot Avatars for Telecommuters

Posted on by
Reply

Which do you think is likely to occur first? Sophisticated, remote-controlled, look-alike robots becoming affordable to the average person or full-time telework (for jobs that can be done remotely) gaining widespread acceptance? I’ve often wondered this. If it’s the former, and since I’m petite in stature, I imagine I would stash my stand-in double in the workstation’s coat closet so it would be ready to warm that office chair bright and early! I’d command it to work, and I’d collect the paychecks from afar. I’ve often shared this fantasy in jest without knowing, until recently, that this idea has manifested into reality in the past several years. It’s called telepresence.

The following are video clips of such a robot developed by Willow Garage, and it seems to run smoothly.

Robots Changing the Face of Telecommuting

However, this recent (August 2012) footage of the QB-82 shows that there is still room for improvement. Notice how awkward navigation can be and the occasional Wi-Fi signal interruptions.

My Life as a Telecommuting Robot

Finally this performance review for IvanAnywhere is rather funny.

Some Internet commenters have rightly pointed out that many of us want to work from home in order to avoid office commotion and noise as some jobs are better performed in a peaceful, quiet environment allowing for better concentration and reflection. Thus, having to experience the office chatter and interruptions through robots goes against the whole purpose of working remotely. However, I don’t think this has to be an “all or nothing” issue. If such robots become sufficiently cost-effective,  even those of us who enjoy working in an isolated, quiet environment have some reason to use them sparingly and when it’s most important to (e.g., at important meetings, to establish a presence at the office from time to time). Finally, this technology is a great solution for those who can’t travel for whatever reason (e.g., disabilities, illness, etc.) and want to work from home but yet be fully integrated into the office scene. What are your thoughts?

Tips for Employees Requesting an Alternative Work Arrangement

Posted on by
Reply

During a conversation about employee engagement consulting and promoting alternative work arrangements someone once asked me, “How does any of this help people? How can any employee use this information or call in consultants to help improve their working conditions?” My conversation partner asserted that a consulting business didn’t seem very helpful overall as employees have to wait around for leaders to decide to change everything around of their own accord. Back then, I was also under the impression that this kind of change tends not to happen from the bottom up.

Contrary to our beliefs, The Custom-Fit Workplace: Choose When, Where, and How to Work and Boost Your Bottom Line, states that more employees than managers or leaders initiate new flexible work arrangement programs. Although, as depicted in these accounts of employee-initiated programs, the arrangement tends to be for the individual employee concerned rather than an organization-wide makeover.

The Custom-Fit Workplace

Throughout The Custom-Fit Workplace, authors Joan Blades and Nanette Fondas provide detailed, qualitative accounts of employees successfully negotiating with their managers to implement such programs. That said, this book emphasizes hope and inspirational stories and does not provide quantitative information about the number of negotiations that succeed out of the number attempted.  Moreover, all of the cases involve employees with a track record of providing value to their organization rather than employees who are new or performing below satisfaction.

Finally, the authors provide helpful guidelines on crafting an alternative work arrangement proposal and successfully negotiating the program’s terms with their manager. They also provide a specific, comprehensive (5-paged) template for a Babies-At-Work program covering the terms, policy, eligibility requirements, and liability concerns. If you would like to propose an alternative work arrangement program (e.g., flexible hours, virtual work, contract work, or Babies-At-Work), prepare your request as a formal, professional document that addresses the following:

  • Highlight how the program will add value to the organization (as it should be a win-win solution)
  • Provide a detailed plan that shows how you will get your work done
  • Establish a trial period and an end date for evaluation (in order to provide an opportunity for the other party to evaluate and end the program if it doesn’t work out well)¹

In sum, showing that you sought out a solution that benefits the business should help make your proposal more palatable to your manager or leader. With that thought, I’ll have to get my daily brain activity imaged so prospective employers will see the extent of hyperproductivity they miss out on when I can’t work predominantly at night!

¹Paraphrased from The Custom-Fit Workplace: Choose When, Where, and How to Work and Boost Your Bottom Line by Joan Blades and Nanette Fondas (p. 54). Original source: James Johnson’s presentation, “Talent Troubles: How to Attract and Keep Good People and Control Costs, ” April 22, 2008

Link

There are a number of benefits to teleworking that may already be familiar to you because they are reiterated time and time again. However, I will quickly summarize them for those who are new to this subject matter:

For employees who can telework and work well this way:

  • Can save thousands of dollars annually that would otherwise go towards gas and office clothes
  • Improves work-life balance by freeing up 1-2 hours (or more for those who commute even further) so that employees have the option to get right to work instead of wasting time in rush hour traffic as well as being able to get necessary errands done without a hassle (e.g., picking up kids from daycare/school)
  • Under a Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) where work can be done anywhere, anytime as long as the work is done on time, employees can lead a healthier lifestyle by not having to stay sedentary for 8-10 hour time blocks (includes commute time). See Frederick Pilot’s blog, Health Insurance Crisis, to understand how this correlates with the rising cost of health care as well as to obtain status reports about this crisis.

For employers:

  • Reduces real estate costs (for the physical space itself as well as additional costs of maintenance and utilities)
  • A more decentralized workforce allows business to continue during emergencies such as natural disasters, terrorist attacks, etc.
  • Employees who are well-suited to telework are more engaged and productive working from wherever they want, instead of at the office, which adds to the bottom line
  • When recruiting, employers can hire the best people for the job regardless of their geographic location
  • Having this option for employees enjoy more freedom and flexibility at work improves recruitment and retention, reducing the cost of turnover

For environmental conditions:

  • Less congestion for those who must travel to work as well as reduces wear and tear on deteriorating freeway infrastructure from having so many people utlizing it during rush hour
  • Although there’s some debate over whether or not teleworking employees make up for not having to commute to an office by driving elsewhere, a reduced need to build additional office building space and expand freeways does mean a decreased carbon footprint
  • The more we can curtail the growth of our freeways and buildings as our population grows, the more space we leave for wildlife

Upon mentioning the benefits listed above in my conversations with people, I get a range of reactions. Sometimes it’s disbelief – as if I were just talking about the benefits of teleportation.  Sometimes it’s a “Gee that would be great!” followed by moving onto another conversation topic. At other times it is resistance because people are used to the Industrial Age work arrangement and/or love the face-to-face, social aspect of a centralized office. However, as dog owners are not hard to find in the United States, when I begin asking how long people’s dogs have to wait before they can eliminate their waste, reactions change. Yes, there are obedient dogs that wait 9-10 and even 14 hours on a particularly bad day for their owners to come home and let them out.  I’m speculating that the 14 hour figure represents overtime work and/or some event on the freeway (perhaps an accident) that has slowed traffic down to an unusual pace. They are most probably coping by not drinking enough water during the day. Just how many of us can live this kind of lifestyle for 8-10 hours a day, 5 days a week? One dog owner told me that this is why she thinks her dog developed bladder stones some years later.

Let’s remember that a great many people (apartment/condominium dwellers and those who don’t have fenced in yards) can’t just leave their dogs outside. Additionally, although people can send their children to daycare or school and have their aging or disabled family members stay in some type of “home,” daycare for dogs isn’t prevalent for some obvious reasons. For example, there would be some amount of chaos as new, unfamiliar dogs arrive and intermingle. So, as many would say, it’s better to surrender your pets to someone else who can take better care of them if you cannot. However, I think that what I’m talking about is going on in great numbers (considering the number of people who work in the traditional, 8-hour day arrangement and the number of dog owners). Also, the possibility of a telework arrangement now presents an obvious solution.

To those whose jobs aren’t conducive to remote work or who benefit from the traditional, centralized work arrangement, be supportive of the option to telework anyway. You never know. This may increase the chances that one of your trustworthy teleworking coworkers or neighbors can help out during a break.

I don’t own a dog, but my parrot, Nikita, does not wait in her cage for 8+ hours to be let out. She’s out playing on her parrot play-station nearby or sitting on my shoulder while I work. She’s pretty quiet and not distracting. As I’ve fulfilled my responsibility to give her as much of a natural life as possible, I can work happily. I totally understand why most people want to have that steady paycheck that comes with regular employment. I just hope that more employers out there will see the wisdom of the Information Age working arrangement and take steps towards increasing flexibility and freedom to benefit us all.

Below are links for pet owners who work from home and need a little help with reducing distractions:

Telework Exchange

Bark Busters Home Dog Training

The “Can’t You See I’m Busy!” Game

Posted on by
Reply

Simply wow… I’ve often tossed around the idea that, at some point in the future, a game development company would come in and make big bucks by “gamifying” routine office computer work. However, here’s a clever spin. This site provides games designed to look like work and even has a counter to keep track of how much money players have collectively costed the world economy (assuming an average yearly salary of €31,500): http://cantyouseeimbusy.com/.

I’ve tried all four games and “Cost cutter” is my favorite. It really appeals to this former Tetris lover. Just play an electronic version of “Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy” or “Hungarian Dance” to make the experience complete! Sadly, I think these games are probably more challenging than anything I’ve ever been tasked with doing, and it actually takes some skill and effort to break into the “Highscores.” I didn’t manage to. Suddenly, I think I understand the whole “pretending to work” phenomenon. Someone coming by? No problem! Just hit the spacebar and the game freezes so that it looks like you are working on something on the Excel spreadsheet. Here are the games:

Crash Planning: http://cantyouseeimbusy.com/games/crashplanning/

Breakdown: http://cantyouseeimbusy.com/games/breakdown/

Leadership: http://cantyouseeimbusy.com/games/leadership/

Cost cutter: http://cantyouseeimbusy.com/games/cutcosts/

When Email is Better than Skype and Face-to-Face Communication

Posted on by
Reply

As mentioned in a previous post, I’m going to share my own personal experience with a cross-cultural communication problem that only reared its ugly head when visual cues were available. Thus, this post may substantially depart from my usual writing style.

I hired a career coach and began working with him in September 2012.  Note that this fellow has close to 20 years of experience as a career coach and has been a longtime resident of California’s Bay Area, an area renown for its racial and cultural diversity. Also note that he’s a Caucasian-American dealing with me, an Asian-American (though something like this can happen even when there is a shared cultural or racial heritage given enough difference in personality). In my situation, this meant that there are body language dynamics that are vastly different in meaning (e.g., maintaining eye contact with your conversation partner). By the way, I live in California also, but we agreed to handle my case using technology to save me from having to make long drives.

He and I seemed to be communicating well and getting along swimmingly as we emailed back and forth. Trouble began when we started conversing on Skype. I began discussing my interest in workplace boredom and employee engagement consulting, and I tried to share some information with him. He did not believe that a workplace boredom phenomenon exists. He could see people being stressed, but not bored. This phenomenon is really quite easy to understand however. Here you go:

Satisfaction From Work

He also kept reiterating that consulting businesses that serve employers needs do not exist. He also believed that telework is a theoretical concept as no one in his social network was working this way. Words began to fail me as I saw that he was just hellbent on keeping information to the contrary away.

Noticing that I could barely form words at this point, he leaned a little forward into the webcam as he inspected my body language and said, “You’re nervous!” and then continued, “You’re intimidated by me!” Actually, I was exasperated and now so stunned at his  confidence in his body language reading skills that I didn’t know what to say. He continued making other body language reading mistakes. This was going off about as well as a dog trying to read a cat’s behavior. I corrected him on his westernized assumptions about how friendships are formed when we discussed why I neither love nor engage in social chatter about various topics that tend to happen in the office scene. To that, he replied, “So you think you’re more Thai then?” “Well, geez,” I should’ve replied, “Do I look white to you???” I wish I was able to correct him at every instance in which he made mistakes but there were just too many. Also, as introverted as I am, my mind tends to be processing things so deeply that I remain a step behind during fast-paced conversations. Don’t you hate it when the clever retorts come to you after the situation has passed? I could have played this little game right along with him, leaned into my webcam and said, “You’re presumptuous!” “You jump to conclusions!” “You’re an obnoxious fool!”

The moral of the story: Ask, don’t assume. If you want to know how I feel then ask, don’t assume. If you want to know what my state of mind is then ask, don’t assume.

Had this guy been dealing with people overseas, he would have lost so many clients and offended so many people. I’m bringing this subject to attention because I’ve come across so many of these instances where someone assumed more similarity than there really is. This doesn’t just happen with people who have been “living under a rock” but with people who really should know better as well. People can still make assumptions about others based on the way they write. Also note that I am NOT discounting the conditions under which being able to read body language is beneficial. However, I have to laud communication methods without visuals for this one reason: It inhibits deeply ingrained assumptions that people often make because of the way someone looks or behaves.

He and I never interacted face-to-face but, somehow, I don’t think doing so would have prevented him from depending so much on his body language reading skills and cultural knowledge that only pertains to people similar to himself. Even worse, I would have had to resist recurring thoughts telling me to reach over and strangle him.

Mass Career Customization: Aligning The Workplace With Today’s Nontraditional Workforce

Posted on by
Reply

Before delving into Mass Career Customization, I’d like to address a paper titled The Hidden Work In Virtual Work (click to download). It describes the high personal costs some remote workers have borne while trying to achieve work-life balance and maintain professional connections. I imagine that this paper can scare many away from the prospect of telework. However, note the limitations of this study. Like any good researcher, Heimrich Schwartz describes the methodology for collecting data. This study was based on information gathered from twenty-three informants who were recruited from the researchers’ social network. Therefore, like most qualitative studies, this study has a low sample size. Furthermore, participants were not randomly selected. Having drawn from their own personal network, participants are more likely to share similarities than if drawn from a pool that represents all remote workers. It is quite possible that their recruitment method did not capture the experiences of successful remote workers who thrive under this working condition.

There is no discounting the fact that not everyone can or wants to work remotely, and it’s important to point out all the problems – whether potential or real. I have not found any telework advocates who think that everyone should work this way. In fact, they make it clear that this is a choice and is contingent upon an individual’s ability to work and keep a balanced life in this arrangement. I envision that determination as to who becomes a teleworker or not is, in large part, a self-selection process as people, through both good and bad experiences, choose their occupation based on their likes and dislikes which are a function of their own traits and characteristics. Some jobs can be performed remotely while others can’t. Many telework advocates are also clear that management needs to look out for those who are struggling and provide a way to transition back to the office if necessary. Thus, it is important to bring attention to cases so that such disastrous situations can be prevented or resolved. As it turns out, possible solutions are not far behind.

Upon reading Mass Career Customization by Cathleen Benko and Anne Weisberg of Deloitte LLP, I realized that we may yet find ways to support people who want to work remotely but struggle at it. In fact, the authors describe how this system, which gives employees control over multiple facets of their job, can be used in conjunction with telework. With Mass Career Customization (MCC) employees can adjust the pace, workload, location/schedule, and role according to their needs throughout their career. This book takes you through the process of implementing MCC (from how to make a business case for it and get buy-in from key people in the organization to running it) and provides detailed case studies of a few organizations that have successfully incorporated it. Organizations enjoy benefits such as improved recruitment and retention of talent, increased levels of employee satisfaction and engagement, and a clear, honest account of human capital resources.

Benko and Weisberg point out how much more realistic it is to view people’s investments in their career as a sine wave. During the course of life there are times when personal or family needs predominate. At other times, people are more career driven. In contrast to the traditional family structure where men worked 40 hours a week while women spent all of their time taking care of the home, children, and other non-work related duties, the vast majority now have to juggle work and family resulting in this ebb and flow of investment in career. Thus, most organizations are still geared towards a way of life that has all but vanished. This change in family structure, shortage of skilled knowledge workers, increased number of women in the workforce, nontraditional expectations of Generation X and Y workers, and impact of technology have converged. To thrive, organizations would do best to accommodate by incorporating a more flexible system. The authors thoroughly explain why MCC is superior to current flexible work arrangements (FWA). FWAs fail to serve employees’ needs because they are point, rather than systemic, solutions. For example, an employee goes on maternity leave and then is expected to work the same way she did prior to her leave of absence. Under MCC, this change in her life would still be considered so that she has the option to dial down on various aspects of her job as needed. That said, the authors point out that MCC is about more than work-life balance; it’s about career-life fit.

Back to the issue of cases in which telework destroyed work-life balance for some workers. By pinpointing such problems telework critics have provided a great service because, upon realizing these problems, we can develop appropriate solutions. Although people who know me would describe me as very self-disciplined and great at maintaining strong boundaries, I have experienced how unpleasant it can be for work and life to bleed into each other myself (having contrasted my experiences managing the pace and workload at the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral level), so I am quite sympathetic to the people in Shwartz’s study. It dawned on me, however, that even for self-disciplined people, increasing pace or workload makes it more difficult to separate work and life. At some point, even the most self-disciplined would suffer. If there is a valuable employee who wants to work remotely but handles it better at some point lower than 100% pace or workload AND does not require or want to be fully dialed up, then why not consider it?

It is important to discuss, debate, and be wary of any way our creations might turn on us. At this point however, marching us all back into Industrial Age workplace practices does not sound like a viable option. There are already people thriving as remote workers. With some imagination and innovation, we may well come up with systems to support those who want to work remotely but struggle with it. The great plethora of ideas and inventions we have developed to solve our problems throughout the history of mankind never ceases to amaze me.  Thus, I am quite optimistic that we can troubleshoot the problems Shwartz brought up. In closing, here is my favorite quote from Mass Career Customization (page 148): We tend to walk into the future backward, perhaps wanting to go in a new direction but not realizing that we are defining the new direction relative to our past experiences.