Teleworking in the information sector in Spain

Teleworking in United Arab Emirates (UAE): An Empirical Study of Influencing Factors, Facilitators, and Inhibitors

“…This research confirms the importance of individual freedom, community concerns, and productivity as key teleworking facilitators perceived by employees. This is in agreement with the mainstream literature that support the perceived importance of personal freedom and autonomy as an immediate symbolic result of employees' interaction with teleworking adoption (Feldman and Gainey (1997;Pulido and Lopez, 2005). In addition, teleworking impact on the society as expressed by employees is clear and tangible on the short run.…”

“…According to Mills et al (2001) and Tung and Turban (1996) organizational facilitators for teleworking adoption may include securing skilled employees, saving office space, reducing turnover and absenteeism, computer literacy and usage, productivity gains, overcoming limitations of distance and time, providing service from home terminals, and reducing operating cost. Individual facilitators for teleworking, on the other hand, include initiating personal freedom, autonomy, and flexibility (Feldman and Gainey (1997), support no conflicting working environment (Pulido and Lopez, 2005), increasing personal productivity, avoiding a commute, working with fewer interruptions, working in more pleasant surroundings, wearing informal casual clothes, saving the costs of meals, clothes, and commuting, greater time flexibility, greater job satisfaction, and bridging the career gap by avoiding a long career break staying at home (Mills et al, 2001;Tung and Turban, 1996).Community or societal related teleworking facilitators may include reduction of air pollution and dependence on fuel, enable disabled people to work from home, conserve energy and reduce traffic during rush hours and demand on transportation, and solving the problem of rural depopulation (Mills et al, 2001;Tung and Turban, 1996).…”

“…According to Mills et al (2001) and Tung and Turban (1996) organizational inhibitors of teleworking adoption may include technology cost inefficiencies, managing out-of-sight employees, need for collaboration with other employees, security risks, problems of supervision, performance control difficulty, work coordination difficulty, legal liability, maintenance of equipment. From the individual point of view, inhibitors may include isolation, doubts and lack of knowledge of the state of a task, unavailability of necessary supplies or equipment, family interruptions and household distractions, no separation of work and home life, lack of interactions with co-workers, and potential lack of loyalty to company, not having a regular routine, workaholics, impedes career opportunities, and missing -what's going on‖, problem of 'guilt', and increase in cost of equipment and utilities at home (Mills et al, 2001;Tung and Turban, 1996;Pulido and Lopez, 2005). From the community perspective, teleworking may be inhibited as a result of promoting dispersion of housing, increasing commuting distances, slowing down of real estate market, and declining clothing industry (Mills et al, 2001;Tung and Turban, 1996).…”

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Stated Preference of Academic Employees Tow Ards Telecommuting in Iium Campus, Gombak

“…The results showed that -increase flexibility to work at own pace‖ was the most important factor (RII=0.84). Previous studies also mentioned that the importance of individual's freedom is one of the key telecommuting facilitators as perceived by employees (Feldman and Gainey, 1997;Pulido and Lopez, 2005). -Proper management of time‖ was the second most important factor (RII=0.81) followed by -having more time with family‖ (RII=0.80), -ability to reduce travel time‖ (RII=0.78) and -ability to contribute in reducing traffic congestion‖ (RII=0.78).…”

Why Some SME’s in the Czech Republic Adopt Telework and Others Not?

“…A very significant link, which was anticipated by the results of the Spanish (Mayo, 2009) and the Canadian study (Chalmers, 2008) has been confirmed between the IT levels and TW adoption. In the questionnaire, companies were asked which hardware and software devices supporting TW they use (Pulido, 2005) and based on the responses, SMEs were divided into 6 levels. Very few SMEs have reached the highest level of 6, whereas 92% of SMEs have the level 4.…”