The Prevalence and Consequences of Distributed Work in Europe IS1202 Training School on Virtual Work, 16–20 September, University of Malta Satu Ojala & Pasi Pyöriä

Spatial Dispersion of Work - SPACE 0 The Aim of the Project: To analyze the prevalence and consequences of mobile work arrangements, e.g. working at home Funded by the Academy Finland (2010–2013) 0 The data: Statistics (European Working Conditions Survey EWCS and representative stats from Finland: Finnish Quality of Working Life Survey & Use of Time Survey) Case study material (20 interviews collected from two Finnish public sector organizations)

Distributed Work – An Alternative to Working at the Traditional Office Satellite & neighborhood work centers Flexible work arrangements (e.g. flexi-time) Generic offices (hoteling) Telework (usually home) and mobile work (vehicles, customers’ premises, cafes etc.) 0 25 % of European employees and entrepreneurs are “e-nomads”, working sometimes on the road, at their homes or at customers’ premises, using information technology. In Finland, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands the proportion of e-nomads is over 40 %. (Eurofound 2012).

The Main Dimensions of Telework 1. Time 2. Space 3. Technology 4. Agreement European Framework Agreement on Telework: Telework is a form of organizing and / or performing work, using information technology, in the context of an employment contract / relationship, where work, which could also be performed at the employer’s premises, is carried out away from those premises on a regular basis.

European Working Conditions Survey countries 0 At about 1000 respondents per country 0 90–95 % employees 0 5–10 % self-employed / entrepreneurs per country 0 Collected by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 0 Our selection of respondents: 0 27 countries: EU + Norway 0 All employed wage-earners 0 Small entrepreneurs: all self-employed without employees + self- employed with 1–3 employees

European Working Conditions Survey Measures for distributed work: 1. Where is your main place of work? 1. My employers / My own business premises 2. Clients’ premises 3. A car or another vehicle 4. An outside site 5. My own home 6. Other 2. Have you worked in any other location in the past 3 months Equal alternatives  respondent can choose several locations

HIGHLY EDUCATED EMPLOYEES MAIN PLACE OF WORK OTHER THAN EMPLOYERS’ PREMISES

LESS EDUCATED EMPLOYEES MAIN PLACE OF WORK OTHER THAN EMPLOYERS’ PREMISES

HIGHLY EDUCATED SMALL ENTRE- PRENEURS MAIN PLACE OF WORK OTHER THAN OWN BUSINESS PREMISES

LESS EDUCATED SMALL ENTRE- PRENEURS MAIN PLACE OF WORK OTHER THAN OWN BUSINESS PREMISES

HIGHLY EDUCATED EMPLOYEES AMOUNT OF SECONDARY PLACES IN WORK IN 3 MONTHS

LESS EDUCATED EMPLOYEES AMOUNT OF SECONDARY PLACES IN WORK IN 3 MONTHS

SMALL ENTRE- PRENEURS (ALL EDUCATIONAL LEVELS DUE TO LOW FREQUENCIES) AMOUNT OF SECONDARY PLACES IN WORK IN 3 MONTHS

When does this work take place? 0 Finnish Use of Time Survey 2010 by Statistics Finland 0 Time diaries: 0 10 minute-episodes throughout 24 hours 0 2 days / each respondent 0 Contains details on: 0 What is the respondent doing 0 Both mainly & secondarily 0 With whom 0 Where is she/he 0 Next: when and where do employees and small entrepreneurs work in a work day? 0 Work days with a minimum of 10 minutes work per that day

All employees, a regular weekday (% of employees working at a certain 10-minute episode)

White-collars, a weekday

Nature of work at home ( Quality of Work Life Survey 2003 & 2008, Finland) “Do you sometimes do work connected with your main job at home?” All“Is this work mainly:”Home- working employees Works occasionally or partially at home 32“Overtime work without compensation” (informal overtime) 56 Works at home only2“It is agreed that some of the normal working hours are done at home (telework) 33 Does not work at home at all 66“Both” / does not know11 Total100 %Total100 % N8496N2748

Entrepreneurs are the most distributed ( all work days)

Agricultural entrepreneurs work the most

How work at multiple locations (1 or 2–6 secondary locations) is related with certain consequences? (EWCS 2010) 0 Speed of work: 0 Work at very high speed AND to tight deadlines 0 1 Never …. 7 All of the time 0 Work in free time to meet work demands: 0 1 Never … 5 Nearly every day 0 Work fit with family: 0 Working hours fit family and/or social commitments 0 1 Very well... 4 Not at all well 0 Multivariate GLM-model that controls for gender, age, country, education, being an employee & being a small entrepreneur 0 Interaction terms between working at secondary locations & gender; education; small entrepreneurs (; country) 0 N= (28 countries)

Work fit with family 1 Very well... 4 Not at all well 0 Means: 0 0 secondary locations: : : Means for highly educated: 0 0: : : 1.94

Work in free time to meet work demands: 0 1 Never … 5 Nearly every day 0 0: : :2.9 0 For highly educated with 2+: 3.1

Work at very high speed and to tight deadlines 0 1 Never …. 7 All of the time 0 Work at several locations strongly increases sense of haste 0 Means: 0 0: : : 3.6

Take Home Lessons Although distributed work is on the increase, the majority of employees still carry out most of their work at their employers’ premises during “normal” working hours Homeworking is often informal overtime without extra compensation: There is no consensus on how to measure distributed work arrangements BUT the aspect of agreement should be taken into account (telework vs. overtime at home) An agreement would benefit both employer and employee Work combining main work place + 1 additional location may increase sense of control / balance for work and family (e.g.) More distribution of work increases negative outcomes for employee & family In virtual environments, work process may become fragmented and information overload may increase – increased work in free time Distributed work only at reasonable levels! E.g. 1–3 days per week outside of an office appears to be optimal for most teleworkers

THANK YOU! Follow our work on

References 0 Eurofound (2012) Fifth European Working Conditions Survey. 0 Nätti, Jouko & Tammelin, Mia & Anttila, Timo & Ojala, Satu (2011) Work at Home and Time Use in Finland. New Technology, Work and Employment 26(1): 68–77. 0 Ojala, Satu (2011) Supplemental Work at Home among Finnish Wage Earners: Involuntary Overtime or Taking the Advantage of Flexibility? Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies 1(2): 77–97. 0 Ojala, Satu & Nätti, Jouko & Anttila, Timo (2014) Informal Overtime at Home instead of Telework: Increase in Negative Work-Family Interface, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, (3) Pyöriä, Pasi (2003) Knowledge Work in Distributed Environments: Issues and Illusions. New Technology, Work and Employment 18(3): 166– Pyöriä, Pasi (2009) Virtual Collaboration in Knowledge Work: From Vision to Reality. Team Performance Management: An International Journal 15(7–8): 366– Pyöriä, Pasi (2011) Managing Telework: Risks, Fears and Rules. Management Research Review 34(4): 386– Vartiainen, M. & Hakonen, M., Koivisto, S. & Mannonen, P. & Nieminen, M.P. & Ruohomäki, V. & Vartola, A. (2007) Distributed and Mobile Work. Places, People and Technology. Helsinki: Otatieto.