I’ve just received my copy of “Undress for Success: The Naked Truth about Making Money at Home” by Kate Lister and Tom Harnish. As someone who writes about e-working (or teleworking) often, I can understand why, in the first part of the book, the authors brought up the fact that most surveys and studies don’t usually agree about the number of Americans e-working today. Why? Because different researchers and companies define the word differently. An excerpt from the book:
Some researchers count small businesses, others don’t. Some surveys include people who work from home as little as one day a year, while others focus on people who primarily work from home. Some fail to distinguish between paid and unpaid work. None separate out those employees and business owners who work at home from those who work from home.
To address the many incarnations of e-working available, the book is separated into several sections that address the concerns and needs of the following kinds of e-workers:
Each of those three sections contain informative starter guides for beginners. I’m glad that they separated the sections distinctly so that, for example, those who are interested in convincing their supervisor to allow them to telework don’t have to read the section on how you can apply for freelance work online. There’s also a section on how to set up the technology needed for working at home, which can come in handy if the reader is intimidated by the technical stuff.
Although the book quotes several statistics, it also contains anecdotes from actual e-workers. These stories makes the idea of e-working more real to the reader, rather than a theoretical situation. This is essential for people who want to become practicing e-workers. After all, these numbers and stories are what bring the “fantasy” of e-working into reality.
As an e-worker for my entire professional life, I often forget how overwhelming the idea of working from home can be to people who aren’t used to it. With all the information available on the web, it’s hard to separate practical advice from scammy, short sighted ideas. Fortunately, the authors do a good job of providing a clear, concise guide in the form of this book.
(this is a slightly edited and updated version of a post from The Future of Work blog. The original version is here.

First, look at this chart showing the shift from “real” interaction to reliance on electronic media (it comes directly from the article that stimulated this post - Well Connected? The Biological Implications of Social Networking“)
Now, I am as enthusiastic about social networking technologies and their ability to connect us with friends and colleagues all over the planet as the next person, but Marc Van Eeckhoudt just sent me the article that includes that chart.
It’s just been published in Biologist, a British magazine: “Well Connected? The Biological Implications of Social Networking.”
The core message in the article: more and more people are becoming “loners,” and that’s really dangerous for their health. Unfortunately it is not clear from this article whether or not people who rely primarily on electronic means of communication can overcome those health risks.
[This note is cross-posted from the Future of Work blog]
There’s a great new story just published today in Business Week detailing how some organizations are turning to “telecommuting” and flexible work programs as a way to reduce costs and retain employees in these difficult times.
The article (”Telecommuting: Once a Perk, Now a Necessity“), by Michelle Conlin (editor of BW’s Working Life Department), highlights how SCAN Health Plan, BDO Seidman, and Capital One are using flexible work options to cut real estate costs significantly.
The really encouraging side of the story, though, is how many employees relish the reduction in commute times and the rebalancing of their lives (no surprise to us, but still a benefit that’s not widely enough recognized).
I am very pleased that Capital Magazine, based in Dubai, has just published the second installment of an article that Charlie Grantham and I wrote about organizational resistance to Distributed Work - and what to do about it.
The article, “How Come Distributed Work is Still the Next Big Thing?“, appears in the February issue. It’s available online, though free registration is required.
This version of the article is actually a revision and update to a three-part series that ran in our own Future of Work Agenda newsletter a couple of years ago - available as downloadable pdf reprints here (Part One), here (Part Two), and here (Part Three).
We’re pleased at the continuing attention this issue is getting. It can’t be said often enough: there are very real - and completely understandable - reasons why so many organizations resist adopting distributed/flexible work arrangements. But there’s also a highly compelling business case for moving into the “work anywhere” world of the 21st century.
Why do you think resistance to an obviously more productive and more attractive way of working is so prevalent?
I’ve just gotten off a stimulating and (for me, at least) informative conference call with my fellow AppGap bloggers. Among other things we talked about how to collaborate more effectively with each other. One common area of interest is the economic and “green” benefits of virtual collaboration - when we stay off the roads and highways and get our work done remotely and virtually, we’re saving money as well as reducing greenhouse gasses.
That’s such an important opportunity that I thought I’d reprint here a post from my own Future of Work blog that I composed only yesterday - it’s about how flexible/virtual work can actually be a job-saver; and in the current economic crisis that can be really important (both for individuals and for companies).
So here goes:
I’ve just read an engaging blog post by Jennifer Swanberg, an Associate Professor at the University of Kentucky’s Colleges of Social Work and Business. She suggests (no, virtually proves) that adopting a flexible work program can be an effective substitute for laying off employees (”Flexibility Can Offer Alternatives to Downsizing“).
Bay Jordan argued something very similar in our January Future of Work Agenda newsletter (”Rethinking Redundancy“), and Charlie and I have been suggesting for years that most senior executives don’t have any idea just how valuable their human resources (read, “employees”) are.
I particularly liked this comment from Ms. Swanberg’s article:
These are tough times. None of us wants to take a pay cut. But earning less may be better than earning nothing.
Josh Lubin’s article on CNN entitled “Working from home: Not for every ‘Mr. Mom’” immediately caught my eye. In it he gave a detailed account of how he tried to telework after the birth of his daughter, in order to spend more time with her and live the “Mr. Mom” lifestyle. This reflects one of the biggest reasons people choose to telecommute: more time for the family. As good as his intentions are, however, they weren’t enough to make things work.
At first it seemed like a good plan, as his job in a news firm allowed him to work from home, and his responsibilities could be dealt with via email and phone conferences. Initially, things went well. His productivity increased while avoiding the grind of early morning preparations and traffic jams. Then, the baby cried, and kept crying - louder - no matter what he did, right in the middle of a conference call. I could only imagine how nerve-wracking that was for him.
Situations like these underscore the importance of domestic arrangements for telecommuters, and why some decide to go back to the office. In the traditional setup, there’s a clear line between work and personal life, which is convenient for some people. One could argue that he could have gotten used to the arrangement, or even hire a part-time nanny while he worked to ease the transition, but for him I suppose he needed to go back to the office life while he sorted things out.
Another common reason why people would rather go back to the cubicle is the familiar phrase “out of sight, out of mind”. I’ve encountered this line of thought a lot over time, and there’s no denying there’s some truth to it. The best way to keep this kind of fear away, I think, is for companies themselves to institute concrete and non-discriminating performance evaluation procedures. After all, it shouldn’t matter if the employee is beside you or miles from you, as long as he gets the job done and does it well.
Other people cite loneliness and the need for interaction as a reason for preferring to work at the office. If you live on your own in an apartment outside your hometown, you may fall in this category. Still, for some, it’s the craving for a structured environment and even a preference for supervision, because telecommuting from home is taxing in terms of self-discipline. I’ve actually talked to a few people who would rather have a boss watching over them to motivate them to do their jobs well.
It could also be a matter of infrastructure needs not being addressed well enough in order to work efficiently at home. Not all companies support their teleworkers with sponsored broadband Internet connections and office equipment. There may be issues concerning ISP bandwidth and the security of corporate files. This points to the ideal that teleworking should be a joint decision between the individual employee and the company itself, with both parties actively sharing responsibility for ensuring the quality of work, as well as sharing the benefits of such - greater flexibility for the employee and significant cost savings for the employer, among many others.
There’s a strong connection between entrepreneurs and coffee shops. Entrepreneurs — tired of working in isolation — so frequently head to the local coffee shop that it’s become a cliche.
In a coffee shop with other entrepreneurs amid the hustle and bustle of activity, at least they feel connected to the rest of society. For some, it energizes them to have human interaction around them.
Drea at BusinessPundit.com suggests that coworking spaces may displace coffee shops as the workplace of choice for entrepreneurs who are tired of working at home alone, but equally tired of the limitations of the local coffee shop. In Coworking vs. the Coffee Shop: Who Wins? she writes:
Coworking, on the other hand, allows you a range of cafe-like benefits, without the cafe:
-You pay a flat membership fee instead of a daily fee.
-Everyone has a laptop!
-You get the chance to collaborate with your peers.
-The seats are probably more comfortable.
-Cell phone use is more acceptable–it is a workspace.
-The hip factor may not be a factor, although I am not sure about this point.
I think co-working can be a helpful arrangement for some people who work best in an environment with the stimulation of other people around. On the other hand, it might quickly become a negative experience — and distracting.
Here, for instance, is an image of a coworking space from CoworkUtah.

CoworkUtah features a particularly social flavor of coworking — they call it a “social media community workspace.”
To many people this would be an inviting scene. It’s a warm, relaxed, welcoming work arrangement with other humans around. It feels like you could occasionally bounce a question off of someone, or kick around that new idea you have.
But here are the downsides — people who:
You catch my drift — there are a dozen ways others can annoy you in a communal shared space. To some degree it depends on how the coworking space is set up and how closely together you are all crammed in.
I can see how coworking might be energizing and attractive to some, especially extroverted types who crave social interaction and feed on the energy of other people around them. Probably a good target market for coworking spaces are entrepreneurs who would otherwise go to a coffee shop, but are looking for an experience superior to the coffee shop experience.
For those like me who cherish quiet concentration, an absence of distractions, and complete control over our physical setting, it is probably not our cup of tea. But, then, I never much liked working in coffee shops, either.
For more about coworking, including resources, read my earlier piece: Coworking Spaces: Cheap and Sociable.
Be sure to catch Bill Ives' ongoing review series in which he looks at online, sharable database apps. The focus of Bill's reviews: web-based business software that enables companies and individuals to better organize, track, and share information, as well as better manage projects, processes and workflows.
Among the Web-based tools he's reviewed: Zoho, QuickBase, and TrackVia.

Or, if you’d like to get all the tips now, click here to request a copy of the white paper – “7 Ways to Optimize Project Team Productivity: Using Customizable Web-based Software to Your Business Advantage.”.
The AppGap has hosted a series of discussions with leading thinkers and doers intended to illuminate how new apps and approaches are changing the way we work and help companies and individuals implement better collaboration, project management, and productivity practices and solutions. Access, via the links below, the recordings, each about an hour long, of the discussions.
- 5 Big Ideas for Getting All That Work Done
- Should Your Business be Friends with Facebook
- The Future of Work
Need help in getting organized? Want to keep things from falling through the cracks? Check out this free and simple to use online "To-Do List" called Intuit Task Manager, offered by our sponsor Intuit QuickBase. Sign-up is easy so you can get started with it right away.

Intuit's QuickBase, the sponsor of this blog, has just been named an Editor's Choice by PC Mag. Check out the review which calls QuickBase a "a surprisingly simple and elegant application."
Recent Comments
Can today's project management software be done better? What can online CRM help companies companies accomplish? Which development platform can help individuals and organizations build better online databases, Web based applications, and HR solutions? And what are the processes and best practices that help organizations large and small achieve success. Find out more.