teleworking: frameworks for organizational research
TRANSCRIPT
TELEWORKING: FRAMEWORKS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH*
KEVIN DANIELSSheffield University Management School
Mappin StreetSheffieldS1 4DT
UNITED KINGDOMTel: +44 114 2223365Fax: +44 114 2223348
email: [email protected]
DAVID LAMONDMacquarie Graduate School of Management
Macquarie UniversityNSW 2109 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 9850 8984Fax: +61 2 9850 9019
email: [email protected]
PETER STANDENDepartment of Management
Edith Cowan UniversityPearson St Churchlands
WA 6018 Tel: +61 9 273 8335Fax: +61 9 273 8754
email: [email protected]
Revised paper submitted to Journal of Management Studies, November, 1999.
TELEWORKING: FRAMEWORKS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH*
ABSTRACT
Teleworking is a new work practice which entails remote working for at least part of the
week. Common arrangements include work done at home or in the field, by teleworkers in a
range of occupations. As such, telework is one of the most radical departures from standard
working conditions in the suite of flexible work practices now gaining widespread
acceptance. It presents unique challenges for human resource management and
organizational research. In this paper, we develop a model of the reasons for organizational
adoption of teleworking. We do this as a means of integrating the current literature on the
incidence of teleworking and to provide a theoretical grounding and framework for
understanding differentials in the growth of teleworking in different organizations, industries
and countries. We begin by developing an appropriate framework for conceptualising
teleworking. We propose a multivariate approach that is able to differentiate the different
forms of teleworking. We then use this framework to develop a model and a series of
propositions concerning the adoption of different forms of teleworking. Neo-institutional
theory, as well as recent empirical evidence on teleworking informs this model.
1
INTRODUCTION
From the days when it was described as the "next workplace revolution" (Kelly, 1985),
interest in telework1 has grown among workers, employers, transportation planners,
communities, the telecommunications industry and others (Handy and Mokhtarian, 1996).
Commentators have suggested that there are many possible costs and benefits of teleworking,
summarised in table I (see e.g. Grant, 1985; Andriessen, 1991; Gurstein, 1991; Crossan and
Burton, 1993; Gray et al., 1993; Huws, 1994; Gillespie et al., 1995; Hamblin, 1995; IRS,
1996a, Sato and Spinks, 1998).
INSERT TABLE I HERE
It is estimated that in 1993 there were up to 1.27 million teleworkers in the UK and up to 5.89
million teleworkers in the USA (Gray et al., 1993). More recent figures suggest that there are
now between 8 and 9 million teleworkers in the USA (Glosserman, 1996; Rourke, 1996).
Others dispute these figures, making more conservative estimates (e.g. Gillespie et al., 1995).
In Western Europe, Brewster et al. (1994) estimate that less than 1% of organizations use
teleworking practices and Korte et al. (1994) estimate that teleworkers comprise less than 1%
of the work forces in European Community member states, and only up to 7% in the most
industrialised states. In Australia, estimates from official statistics suggest that about 1% of
the work force are engaged in non-trivial telework (McLennan, 1996). Some studies indicate
that teleworking is increasing or likely to increase. Huws' (1993) survey of 1000 employers
in the UK indicated that, while 6% already employed staff who used information technology
1* We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers from JMS for their helpful comments on an
earlier draft this paper.
? Telework or teleworking is also referred to as telecommuting and, occasionally,
homeworking. In this paper, we use the term ‘teleworking’ as a more inclusive term for a
variety of work styles. This is explained later in the paper.
2
to work remotely from the work place, a further 8% expected to introduce teleworking. In a
survey of 305 senior US executives, 70% predicted that teleworking would increase in their
companies throughout 1996 (Frazee, 1996). More recently, the European Commission
estimate that the number of teleworkers has risen from 0.8% to 3.1% of the workforce
between 1997 and 1998 (1998).
Together these studies do indicate that an identifiable practice of teleworking exists in several
countries, and may increase in the future. Reasons for discrepancies amongst these studies
may include non-comparable definitions used in different studies (Gillespie et < biblio >);
and different levels of analysis used in different studies (i.e. organizations using telework vs
proportion of teleworkers in the labour force). Moreover, these surveys on the incidence of
teleworking have tended to be descriptive, and the rate of change is has been so rapid that
even recent statistics on the incidence of teleworking practice may now be out of date
(Tregaskis, 2000). To go beyond description and provide a platform for future research and
prediction of future levels of teleworking, it is then suitable to attempt to uncover the causal
processes involved in the adoption of teleworking. We attempt to do this here by developing
a model of the adoption of teleworking practices at the level of the organization. This model
draws upon empirical evidence and is grounded in neo-institutional theory.
We consider neo-institutional theory an appropriate grounding for several reasons. First,
teleworking is as much a form a flexible working as a technological arrangement for job
design, and has a number of hypothesised societal benefits (table I). Therefore, its adoption
is likely to be influenced by societal values and transport, labour, trades union and related
legislation (see e.g. Johnston and Botterman, 1997). Second, whilst early adopters of
teleworking arguably were motivated by the hypothesised technical, motivational or
3
economic advantages (table I, cf. Tolbert and Zucker, 1983, DiMaggio, 1988), future
generations of adopters will be influenced more by institutional processes as teleworking
becomes an accepted organizational practice (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983) or else
teleworking may become a short lived phenomenon (cf. Abrahamson, 1996). Third, the
development and adoption of the technology to support teleworking is likely to be imbedded
in institutionalised practices, rules and routines (Goodrick and Salancik, 1996, Zyglidopoulos,
1999). Fourth, recent developments in neo-institutional theory have increased its range of
explanation by integrating: notions of choice, agency and motivation to resist or change
institutionalised practices (Oliver, 1991, Suchman, 1995, Goodrick and Salancik, 1996,
Lawrence, 1999); and showing how task or technical based explanations that emphasise
economic efficiency complement institutional explanations that emphasise legitimacy (Scott,
1987, Oliver, 1997, Deephouse, 1999).
We proceed by developing a framework for conceptualising different forms of teleworking,
which builds upon other definitions, whilst introducing new elements not considered
previously with telework. We then develop a model of the adoption of teleworking practices.
From this model, we develop a number of propositions concerning the organizational,
industry sector and national characteristics associated with the adoption of different
teleworking practices. To conclude, we distil issues for organizational research.
CONCEPTUALISING TELEWORK
Grant (1985:25) characterised teleworking as "one kind of remote working, or doing normal
work activities while away from one's normal workplace". Kelly (1985:2) similarly defined
telecommuting as simply "working away from the central office". Regenye (1985:15) was
more specific, referring to telecommuting as an opportunity to "for employees to work out of
4
their homes". While these definitions represent reasonable attempts to come to grips with a
radical new idea, each is deficient. Grant's (1985) definition begs the question as to what
constitutes "one's normal workplace". Kelly's (1985) definition ignores the reality of
dispersed organizational offices other than the "head office", while Regenye (1985) confines
teleworkers to a single location. Later, Olsen (1988, p 77) broadened the definition of
telework as ‘organizational work performed outside of the normal organizational confines of
space and time, augmented by computer and communications technology’. This was
extended by Gray et al. (1993: 2), who proposed that:
‘[t]eleworking………. entail(s) working remotely from an employer, or from a traditional
place of work, for a significant proportion of work time. Teleworking may be on either a full-
time or part-time basis. The work often involves electronic processing of information, and
always involves using telecommunications.’
The important feature of both these definitions is the explicit provision that telework is
supported by information and communications technologies (ICTs), whether this is simply a
telephone or a more sophisticated arrangement including faxes, modem links and email.
However, teleworkers are not a homogeneous group (Crossan and Burton, 1993). It is
necessary to develop further classification of the various forms of teleworking. One group of
authors (Andriessen, 1991; Gray et al. 1993; Huws, 1994; IRS, 1996a) has proffered such a
classification in broad terms as:
Home based telework where work duties are carried out at home;
Teleworking from remote offices where work is done at offices that are remote from the main
office: at "satellite offices" (controlled by the employer); at telecentres (information
technology and work space is provided for a given community and employers are asked to
5
rent space for their employees); or at telecottages (where training is provided for users, and
attempts are made to attract employment for self-employed teleworkers);
Mobile telework: where work is done by people whose work usually involves travel and/or
spending time on customers' premises, who may be equipped with laptop computers and
mobile phones to support their mobile work; such mobile workers might include consultants
working on clients premises; vehicle based workers, such as sales, maintenance engineers or
delivery services; less frequent mobile workers who are able to work whilst travelling, for
example on trains, planes or in cars or from hotel rooms (Gray et al, 1993).
These sets of classifications add to our understanding of the different forms of telework, but
they are incomplete as they focus only on location. They also lend themselves to a binary
notion of telework - one either does it or one does not - and tend to ignore the fact that while
telework can be exclusively based in one location, it can also consist of a combination of
many styles and traditional office based work (Qvortrup, 1998). For example, one survey of
teleworking (IRS, 1996a) utilised a definition of teleworkers as individuals who: have
employee status within their companies or organizations; spend at least 50% of their working
time teleworking away from their employers' main premises; and need to use a computer or
word processor and a telecommunications link to their employers in order to telework. While
each of these points seems reasonable and consistent with other research categories, they are,
nonetheless, narrow and partial. The requirement for 50% of working time excludes those
who engage in teleworking activities less frequently, or who work from home extensively
during only certain periods of the year, and characterises those workers who engage in
teleworking for 50% of the time as the same as those who engage in teleworking 100% of the
time. The need to use a computer or word processor and a telecommunications link would
exclude those (e.g. field representatives and service personnel) whose prime method of office
6
contact is remote telecommunication but whose actual work does not require computer
technology. Such definitions lose the richness and subtlety afforded by continuous variables,
as well as potentially focusing attention away from the idea that the extent to which an
individual engages in different teleworking practices can change over time.
Further, we argue to address adequately the organizational issues raised by telework, it is
necessary to develop a typology involving several additional dimensions. One that has
received attention in the literature is whether telework jobs are classified as "professional,
managerial or technical", or as "clerical, manufacturing or semi-skilled" jobs (Olsen, 1989).
Compared to clerical, manufacturing or semi-skilled, professional, managerial or technical
jobs are more knowledge-intensive. Following Frenkel et al. (1995), ‘knowledge’ here refers
to the theoretical or abstract knowledge that underlies the work of professional, managerial or
technical ‘knowledge workers’ rather than the less intellectual, less creative, more
contextually-based knowledge used by ‘routine workers’. More knowledge intense jobs are
then characterised by outputs which are not as easily measured; they are less routine; they are
more complex; they require greater concentration, less supervision, more on-the job learning
and more complex interactions with clients or colleagues (Ramsower, 1985; Olson 1987;
Heilmann, 1988; Leidner, 1988). By virtue of the education and experience required to get
them, more knowledge intensive jobs can involve greater autonomy over the scheduling and
choice of methods to complete tasks (Leidner, 1988). Teleworking in these more knowledge
intensive jobs is oriented to longer terms goals than less knowledge intensive teleworking and
is more likely to be salaried (Leidner, 1988).
The central notion of telecommunications technology in teleworking raises issues of isolation
(Gurstein, 1991; Olsen, 1985; Gray et al., 1993; Gillespie et al., 1995) and communication
between parties (Gray et al., 1993; Gillespie et al., 1995). Therefore, we consider two other
7
important aspects to involve the degree of intra-organizational contact required by
teleworkers, and the degree of external contact with clients and other parties. The former can
be defined in terms of the degree of "embeddedness" within the organization, which includes
the amount of necessary contact with other members of the organization. The latter is
defined simply in terms of how much contact the individuals have with persons/organizations
external to the organizations for whom they are working. The degree of internal and external
contact is distinct from ICT usage. For example, a home based telephone operator may have
considerable external contact, but little internal contact and use a relatively narrow set of
ICTs (e.g. telephone and data base). A home based computer programmer may have
infrequent contact with clients, but make extensive use of a wide range of ICTs when contact
is made (email, videoconferencing, WWW sites, group-ware).
We consider it appropriate to examine teleworking in terms of these five variables:
Variable 1: Location - the amount of time spent in the different locations: traditional office,
home, remote office/telecottage, nomadic (see e.g.. Gray et al., 1993; Gillespie et al., 1995);
Variable 2: ICT usage – range of ICTs used - home/mobile computer, fax, modem, phone,
mobile phone, use of WWW sites (cf. Gray et al., 1993);
Variable 3: Knowledge intensity - extent of knowledge required to complete tasks, indicated
by, for example, ease of output measures and autonomy of work (cf. Leidner, 1988; Olsen,
1989);
Variable 4: Intra-organizational contact - frequency and range of intra-organizational contact
(e.g. Gillespie et al., 1995);
Variable 5: Extra-organizational contact - frequency and range of extra-organizational
contact (cf. Gray et al., 1993).
8
To be considered as teleworking, we would argue that variables 1 and 2 have to take non-zero
values – that is: i) at least a fraction of working time within a defined period has to be spent at
home, at a remote office or engaged in mobile working; and ii) at least a fraction of work
tasks necessitate the use of ICTs. We would argue that teleworking then consists of any
positive non-zero values of these two variables. However, the exact form of teleworking
depends on the level of these two variables, and variables 3, 4 and 5. Variable 1 - location -
can be conceived of as comprising three elements: the amount of time spent in each of three
alternative locations for teleworking. Variable 2 – ICT use – can be conceived of as
comprising the range of ICTs used. Variable 3 - knowledge intensity can be described only
in relative terms. That is, one form of teleworking can be described only as more, less or of
the same knowledge intensity as another form of teleworking. Variables 4 and 5 - concerning
the extent of communication - can be conceived of as comprising two elements each: the
frequency of contact with others and the number of different people contacted during a
defined period. Each of these variables could logically take on zero as well as non-zero
positive values. Table II illustrates the ability of this arrangement to describe different jobs
amenable to telework. As table II illustrates, many combinations of these variables are
logically possible. However, we might expect to see some combinations more frequently
than others in given contexts, as illustrated in the next section.
INSERT TABLE II HERE
MODELLING THE ADOPTION OF TELEWORKING
In this section, we draw on neo-institutional theory to conceptualise various influences on the
adoption of teleworking practices by organizations. This explanation of adoption is bounded
by a number of considerations. First, our unit of analysis is the organization. We do not
consider adoption at the individual or group level. For instance, we do not consider issues
9
such as whether fathers or mothers with young children are more likely to adopt teleworking
if given the choice. Whilst we also acknowledge that teleworking might effect change in
many of the variables we consider as predisposition to teleworking, such as organizational
structures and cultures, to ensure tractable analysis, we do not consider these questions. We
concentrate on the antecedents, not the consequences, of teleworking.
Neo-institutional theory is concerned with the adoption of similar organizational practices
within defined organizational fields or networks of organizations, linked by, for example,
industry membership, buyer-supplier relationships and common regulatory bodies (DiMaggio
and Powell, 1983). Central to neo-institutional theory is the concept that organizational
actors are motivated to acquire legitimacy for their organization by adopting structures,
strategies and processes that are socially approved by stakeholders external to the decision
making processes within organizations (Meyer and Rowan, 1977). In so doing, organizations
come to adopt a limited range of socially acceptable structures, strategies and processes,
which accounts for observed isomorphism within an organizational field (DiMaggio and
Powell, 1983). Legitimacy confers greater ability to obtain resources from other stakeholders
within the organizational field (customers, suppliers, regulators, DiMaggio and Powell, 1983,
Deephouse, 1999).
DiMaggio and Powell (1983) list three main pressures on the adoption of similar
organizational practices: coercive processes, where organizations or sub-units are forced to
adopt certain practices, for example through legislation; mimetic processes, where
organizations simply copy other organizations; and normative pressures, which originate in
shared mental models amongst a group of actors within an organizational field (Meyer, 1994;
Scott, 1995), and the efforts of that group to establish a legitimate base for the collective
10
wishes of that group. These pressures for isomorphism originate from many sources, as
organizations are embedded in a series of nested fields – the national and industrial fields,
with the organization itself providing a field for actors within that field (Scott, 1995, see also
Clark and Mueller, 1996, on the importance of multi-level models in organizational research).
Recently, neo-institutional theory has been criticized for not acknowledging sufficiently self-
interest and agency (DiMaggio, 1988). However, there have been several attempts to
incorporate self-interest into neo-institutional theory. Oliver (1991) has discussed how firms
might resist institutional pressures to conform; Lawrence (1999) has illustrated how actors,
for their own benefits, may try to shape the decisions made by regulatory bodies to establish
new institutional patterns; Suchman (1995) has shown that there might be multiple sources
and types of legitimacy – so actors are able to choose which type and from which source to
seek legitimacy (although actors would tend to choose those sources of legitimacy for which
they are dependent for resources, Oliver, 1991); and Goodrick and Salancik (1996) have
shown how uncertain institutional standards increase actors’ discretion over organizational
processes.
Neo-institutional theory has also been criticized for not explaining well the processes of
organizational change (Powell, 1991), which are important for the introduction of
innovations. Kondra and Hinings (1998) have argued that there is some diversity present
within any organizational field, due, in part, to imperfect transmission of institutional
influences. This diversity promotes performance inequalities amongst organizations, with
those organizational practices that appear to promote better performance subsequently
becoming adopted by the majority of organizations within an organizational field. Further
diversity may be the result of actors pursuing their own goals as far as institutional pressures
11
allow, leading to performance inequalities and the subsequent adoption of new practices to
enhance performance across the organizational field. It is also recognised amongst neo-
institutional theorists that organizations are subject to varying degrees of institutional
pressures and task or technical pressures for greater efficiency (Scott, 1987). The balance
between the pursuit of efficiency and the pursuit of legitimacy will then depend on the
relative influence of task and institutional pressures (Deephouse, 1999).
There are several arguments why an institutional analysis is needed to explain current and
future up-take of teleworking. The advantages listed in table I as motivations for some or
many teleworking programmes, but notwithstanding analyses which indicate that
technological innovations are likely to be imbedded in institutionalised processes (Goodrick
and Salancik, 1996, Zyglidopoulos, 1999), teleworking is also a human resource management
innovation which is then subject to many of the same regulatory and normative influences as
other human resource management practices (see e.g. Johnston and Botterman, 1997,
Tregaskis, 2000).
The increased emphasises of neo-institutional theory on self-interest, agency, resistance to
institutional pressures and diversity within institutional fields are useful in the context of this
paper, because they allow us to integrate task and institutional explanations for the adoption
of teleworking, and to make predictions of when some forms of teleworking will become
more prevalent than others. Also important in our explanation of teleworking adoption are
actors’ mental models, and the assumption that these mental models, or internal
representations of the environment or how the environment should be, guide behaviour and
the choice of organizational processes (Walsh, 1995, cf. Zucker 1991 pg 104). Indeed,
12
mental models are argued to be important in the processes of innovation (Clark and Staunton,
1989, Swann, 1997).
In discussing the diffusion of innovative organizational practices, Strang and Meyer (1993)
elaborate on the notion of shared mental models and the diffusion of knowledge throughout
an organizational field as an influence on innovation diffusion. Strang and Meyer consider
that as knowledge of a practice develops within an organizational field, shared mental models
of that practice become more elaborate and abstract, enabling the communication of this
knowledge across organizational fields. Aspects of individual mental models of
organizational issues and processes do overlap amongst managers of the same nationality
(Calori et al., 1992), in the same industry (Porac et al., 1989, Spender, 1989) and within the
same organization (Daniels et al., 1994). To mental models of relatively tangible
organizational innovations, we can also add more deep rooted shared assumptions and
attitudes that comprise mental models of the relations amongst individuals, social units and
nature. These are variously referred to as cultures (Hofstede, 1980; Schein, 1992) or
cosmologies (Douglas, 1982; Thompson et al., 1990). We expect these deep rooted mental
models to be shared amongst members of any social unit (Douglas, 1982; Thompson et al.,
1990), from organization to nation state (cf. Hofstede, 1980; Johnson, 1987; Spender, 1989;
Abrahamson and Fombrun, 1994).
Since institutional processes spread partly through mimicry and partly through elaboration of
knowledge, then early adopters of teleworking can have an influence on later adopters of
teleworking. Figure 1 represents these processes. Figure 1 also illustrates the idea that
multiple organizational fields can influence the adoption of teleworking. The figure shows
three organizational fields, each embedded in a super-ordinate field, ranging from the
13
organization field, industrial field and the national field (Scott, 1995). Whilst the notion of
embedded organizational fields is important for explaining the influence of earlier adopters
on later adoption, there are distinct task and institutional pressures which operate within each
organizational field.
INSERT FIGURE 1 HERE
Figure 1 shows that we consider early adopters to be motivated to adopt teleworking if it
enables greater efficiency in obtaining and using resources, especially human resources (cf.
DiMaggio, 1988). Notwithstanding, early adopters will be motivated to establish the
legitimacy of teleworking by communicating to others successful teleworking initiatives.
Later adopters may also be motivated by the pursuit of efficiency, but legitimate acquisition
and use of (human) resources will also motivate them. Also, later adopters may mimic early
adopters or be influenced by their communication (cf. Meyer and Rowan, 1977). In the
following section, we explain the task pressures that are likely to influence early adopters
more strongly in greater detail, at each successive layer of organizational fields from the
organizational level, industry level and national level. Then, we will explain the mimetic and
communicative influences of early adopters on later adopters in greater detail. We will next
outline the coercive and normative pressures that are likely to exert stronger effects on later
adopters. Here, we also outline some reasons why later adopters may not always mimic
earlier adopters or otherwise conform to coercive and institutional processes.
TASK PRESSURES AND EARLY ADOPTION
The initial stages of innovation are likely to be characterised by experimentation and attempts
at alignment to the task environment (Tolbert and Zucker, 1983). Following this line of
reasoning, we would expect early adopters to inhabit organizational fields characterised by
stronger competitive pressures and weaker regulatory and normative pressures (cf. Scott,
14
1987; Oliver, 1997). At the level of the industry, task pressures are likely to be especially
strongest relative to institutional processes during the early stages of industry formation or
during periods of industry flux (cf. Aldrich and Fiol, 1994). Task pressures are likely to be
weaker relative to institutional processes in the public sector or highly regulated industries
such as accounting or law. At a national level, relevant institutional pressures are likely to be
weaker in developed economies with less regulated economies and more liberal labour
legislation, such as the UK and the USA, two of the largest adopters of teleworking practices
(European Commission, 1998). Economies that are developing rapidly and in a state of flux
may be characterised by stronger task relative to institutional pressures and growth in
teleworking – for example the East Asian Tiger Economies (Peter/David – any ideas for
references – or do I footnote the referee or check the web ?)
Whilst, surveys on teleworking adoption from the early 90s indicated a large incidence of
teleworking in task dominated fields, such as the telecommunications, computing and
consulting industries (e.g. ILO, 1990; Huws, 1993), public sector organizations and
organizations from more institutionalised industries (such as banking) were also represented.
Further, Swedish public sector organizations were amongst the first to adopt teleworking
from remote offices (Gray et al., 1993), yet Sweden has a relatively tightly regulated labour
market. These data indicate institutional inertia can be overcome in more institutionalised
fields to enable early teleworking adoption. We reason then, that early adopters of
teleworking need to be characterised by shared mental models amongst key decision makers
that drive the impetus to introduce teleworking practices. These shared mental models must
include the perception that teleworking can realise the kinds of organizational benefits listed
in table I. The extent that these groups of decision makers have political and technical
capabilities will influence their success in persuading and compelling others to implement
15
telework (DiMaggio, 1988; Greenwood and Hinings, 1996). For organizations in
predominantly task driven environments, these political and technical capabilities do not have
to be that well developed. As institutional pressures increase, these capabilities must increase
proportionally with the relative influence of institutional pressures if teleworking is to be
adopted:
Proposition 1: Early adopters of all telewoking practices will be characterised by groups of
key decision makers with shared perceptions of the organizational benefits that teleworking
may provide. These groups will have the political and technical capabilities to overcome any
institutional inertia against teleworking. These capabilities will be greater in more
institutionalised organizational fields than organizational fields dominated by task pressures.
Proposition 1 applies across all levels of organizational fields. For instance, groups of key
decision makers need to have the political and technical capabilities for dealing with
institutional barriers emanating from the organizational, industrial and national levels. There
are task pressures specific to the organizational, industrial and national levels that are likely to
encourage teleworking beyond generic predictions regarding weaker institutional processes,
stronger task pressures and developed political/technical capabilities. It is to these we now
turn.
Task pressures associated with organizations
ILO (1990) statistics indicate that teleworking is unlikely to be found amongst manufacturing
companies. These data indicate one of the prime task pressures on the adoption of
teleworking is the suitability of the specific tasks of a job for teleworking. The predominance
of teleworking in service industries (ILO, 1990, Huws, 1993) indicates that the types of work
that appear most suitable for teleworking are those jobs in which many or all of the tasks
16
require the manipulation, interpretation or communication of data (see also Table II), since
ICTs mean much data is not bounded by physical space.2 Therefore, we would expect the
upper limit on teleworkers to equal within organization to be equal to the number of jobs that
involve the use of information rather than the manipulation of material objects:
Proposition 2: Early adopters of all telewoking practices are more likely to be organizations
with large numbers of workers engaged in information based tasks, and such organizations
are likely to have larger numbers of teleworkers.
Notwithstanding this upper limit, other task pressures may serve to limit the adoption of
teleworking. Principal-agent theory suggests that there might arise conflicts between
employers and employees are they seek to achieve different goals from work (Milgrom and
Roberts, 1992). Since employers are not able to observe teleworkers directly, teleworking
might be more prevalent in to those jobs where performance can be measured easily - for
instance in data entry or translating (cf. van Ommeren, 2000), or in very small organizations
where employers have more chance of noticing poor task completion (cf. Barron et al., 1987).
Alternatively, organizations may be more willing to promote teleworking where employees
have already demonstrated to employers they can be trusted: van Ommeren (1998) reports
that organizations with higher average tenure amongst staff have a greater number of
teleworkers. Therefore:
Proposition 3a: Early adopters of all telewoking practices are more likely to be organizations
with a large number of jobs where task performance is easy to monitor;
and/or
Proposition 3b: Early adopters of all telewoking practices are more likely to contain
managers that exhibit a high degree of trust in workers.
17
As organizations attempt to secure maximum efficiency from their human resources, the
structure of the organization/sub-unit is likely to mediate competitive task pressures. The rise
in knowledge work and the increased sophistication of information technology make it easier
for organizations to develop virtual structures that transcend traditional space and time limits
(Reich 1992; Handy, 1995). These structures can often be characterised as loose federations
of groups and individuals, operating within matrix structures. Virtual structures offer greater
access to skills and organizational flexibility against the vagaries of dynamic and complex
competitive industry forces (Dess et al., 1995; Townsend et al., 1998). We expect that
organizations adopting these structures to be more likely to adopt teleworking: the ICTs used
to enable virtual structures mean that team members are able to work from a variety of
locations. The promotion of teleworking practices in such organizations is likely to favour
knowledge intensive teleworking, with a high degree of intra-organizational contact, as
groups of highly skilled workers co-ordinate activities from a distance, and in extreme cases
disband the organization, unit or team upon completion of the project (Sparrow and Daniels,
1999). We might also expect a rise in both home and nomadic working with these structures
(as opposed to telecottage and remote office working), as workers are tied less to one group
of co-workers.
Proposition 4a: Flexible virtual organizational structures are more likely to influence the
early adoption of home-based or nomadic teleworking characterised by high knowledge
intensity, high intra-organizational contact.
On the other hand, teleworking might be introduced by organizations where the primary
attraction is the promise of cost reductions, for example in terms of full time permanent staff
and office overheads. Here, the emphasis is less likely to be on flexible competitive strategy,
but more on cost and managerial control: teleworking can provide organizations/sub-units
18
with greater opportunities to make use of the contingent work force. Given the low
autonomy and routinisation associated with contingent work, we expect greater use of low
knowledge intensity teleworking, especially of the type that involves little intra-
organizational contact beyond supervisory monitoring. The emphasis on management control
over such jobs may mean mobile teleworking is less likely in such structures, compared to
closer monitoring possible with home based and satellite office teleworking (Olson and
Primps, 1984; Ramsower, 1985).
Proposition 4b: Control oriented organizational structures coupled with competitive strategies
based on control of costs are more likely to influence the early adoption of home-based or
remote office based teleworking characterised by low knowledge intensity with low intra-
organizational contact
In addition, organizational change in itself may trigger the introduction of teleworking
practices. The LeChatelier principle indicates that organizations will introduce changes when
these practices become more cost-effective than current practices, which is most likely when
there are changes to fixed organizational costs (Samuelson, 1947; Milgrom and Roberts,
1996). Therefore, we expect greater adoption of all teleworking practices by organizations
concomitant with other changes, especially where these changes involve changes in other
fixed costs, such as relocation (van Ommeren, 1997).
Proposition 5: Early adoption of all telewoking practices is more likely to occur after
organizational change.
Task pressures associated with industries/sectors
As indicated earlier, we expect that early adopters of teleworking may be found in industries
where task pressures are strongest relative to institutional processes: such as in nascent
19
industries or sectors with that are relatively unregulated. Notwithstanding these factors, we
expect the labour market within an industry or sector to be a strong task influence on the early
adoption of teleworking. Olson (1987) has found that the need to acquire skills in short
supply is encourages the adoption of teleworking. Where there is high demand for labour,
then we expect organizations within an industry to adopt teleworking practices that emphasise
flexibility for employees - such as home based teleworking in particular. This is likely to
occur for both high and low knowledge intensity workers where there are labour shortages.
For example, Hamblin (1995) reports the case of a large public sector employer considering
offering home based teleworking to secretarial staff because of difficulty in recruiting such
staff. As there are more likely to be high demands for knowledge intensive labour, then we
expect most often to see teleworking introduced for high knowledge intensity teleworkers.
Tomaskovic-Devey and Risman (1993) found that managers were more likely to offer
telework to professionals for reasons of improving productivity, job satisfaction or quality of
working life, while they were more likely to offer it to clerical workers to reduce costs.
Proposition 6: Early adoption of home based telewoking is more likely to occur in industries
where labour is in short supply.
Task pressures associated with nations
We have already argued that early adopters of teleworking are more likely to be found in
nations with less regulated, dynamic economies and more liberal labour legislation, all other
things being equal. A number of other task pressures associated with nations can potentiate
the early adoption of teleworking. The ‘information society context’ is one such task
pressure (EIRR, 1996, no 268). Indicators of ‘information society context’ include the
percentage GDP spend on ICT, percentage of home computers, internet usage per capita,
relative costs of information technology and telecommunications usage. The information
20
society context indicates not only the capability of national telecommunications infra-
structures to support teleworking and the relative costs of purchasing the necessary ICTs for
teleworking, but it is also an indicator of ICT literacy amongst the working population, and
hence adaptability to new ICT mediated ways of working. Information society context may
then explain the greater incidence of teleworking observed in the USA and North-Western
Europe compared to Central, Eastern and Southern Europe (Tregaskis, 2000):
Proposition 7: Early adopters of all teleworking practices are likely to be found in countries
with higher percentage GDP spend on ICT, higher percentage of home computers, greater
internet usage per capita, lower relative costs of information technology and
telecommunications usage.
Another task pressure at the national level appears to be related to geography. Physical and
social geography is related to efficiency in securing human resources: The higher incidence of
teleworking in Scandinavia may be related to large geographical distances and low population
density, where home based and remote office teleworking enable employers to recruit from a
wider catchment area (Gray et al., 1993). In addition, large geographical distances and
sparsely populated areas may explain the high penetration of ICT usage in countries such as
Finland and Australia (Johnston and Botterman, 1997). In Japan, remote offices are being
promoted because of lengthy commuting times into central Tokyo. Here however, home
based teleworking is almost unknown, as high property prices preclude building larger houses
to accommodate home offices3, whereas elsewhere, one advantage of teleworking is that it
enables organizations to use less office space in high cost areas (see table I). In Tokyo and
the United States, the threat of natural disasters such as earthquakes has also promoted the use
of decentralised remote office working (Sato and Spinks, 1998), although we expect that
21
there is no special reason for threat of natural disasters to favour a particular type of
teleworking, all other things being equal.
Proposition 8a: Low population density and/or lengthy commuting times will influence the
early adoption of home based and remote office based teleworking.
Proposition 8b: High property prices will influence the early adoption of all forms of
teleworking practices.
Proposition 8c: The threat of natural disasters will encourage early adoption of all forms of
teleworking practices.
The task pressures summarised in the first eight propositions may also apply to later adopters
of teleworking. However, these task pressures are likely to be masked or displaced by a
number of other institutional processes. In the following sections, we describe these
institutional processes in more detail.
INFLUENCE OF EARLY ADOPTERS ON LATER ADOPTERS:
COMMUNICATION AND MIMICRY
There is a liability of early adoption of any new organizational practice: whilst the practice
may impart greater efficiency in the acquisition or use of resources, as a new practice it has
no legitimacy. Therefore, early adopters will be motivated to communicate the advantages of
an innovation to encourage other organizations to adopt and, hence, promote its legitimacy
(cf. Suchman 1995). This perhaps more so for human resource management innovations
rather than many purely technological innovations, given labour market regulations, societal
expectations about management practices and the attention of trades unions and other
employee associations. For example, Jackson (1997) notes that some large
telecommunications and IT companies have very high profile teleworking schemes (Jackson
22
cites Canon, but also British Telecom, IBM, Rank Xerox). The marketing profile of these
schemes may help to establish the legitimacy of teleworking (and hence the legitimacy of the
services and products provided by these companies).
The aim of the communication may take many forms: for instance, early adopters may
attempt to: seek support from high status organizations, especially Government departments
concerned with transport or employment policy; seek new sources of legitimacy by
communicating to employee associations for example; show how teleworking can help
organizations in the same field achieve legitimate objectives – of which two are arguably
enhanced performance or increased employee quality of working life (see Suchman, 1995).
Whilst the aim of the communication may differ slightly, the content will always include
knowledge of the implementation and management of teleworking. During and after the
implementation of teleworking practices, early adopters will develop more elaborate and
abstract knowledge of teleworking practices as their experience develops. The
communication of these more abstract and elaborate mental models may lead to different
forms of teleworking as others adopt these mental models (Strang and Meyer, 1993).
Initially, this is likely to be local to the industry, as the knowledge developed will be specific
to that context. Greater elaboration and abstraction facilitates the diffusion of teleworking
knowledge throughout the layers of the organization field to the level of the nation state, as
knowledge is developed and communicated that is less specific to local industry contexts.
Proposition 9a: Where there is greater theorisation on the advantages, implementation and
management of teleworkers amongst early adopters, subsequently there will be more rapid
adoption of all teleworking practices amongst other organizations in the same industry.
23
Proposition 9b: Where there is greater theorisation, more abstract knowledge will develop
that will facilitate subsequently more rapid adoption of all teleworking practices amongst
other organizations in the same nation.
Whilst we expect this communication to facilitate later adoption of teleworking, we expect
this communication to be moderated by four variables: the extent of ICT usage within a given
industry or nation; the extent of extra-organizational communication between teleworkers in
early adopting organizations and other organizations in the same field; norms of rational
management progress within an industry or nation; and the ability of early adopters to
articulate, sponsor or defend teleworking practices.
Since ICT usage enables many different forms of teleworking, we expect greater diversity of
teleworking where there is greater theorisation about ICTs, for example: in high technology
organizations, that have easier access to ICTs4; in high technology industries - especially
computing and telecommunications industries; and where there is extensive ICT usage at a
national level. Indeed, ILO (1990) indicates that computer manufacturing companies are the
only manufacturers to use a relatively high proportion of teleworkers. At a national level,
this argument adds another layer of explanation on the observed correlation between
information society context and the incidence of teleworking discussed earlier.
Proposition 9c: Where there is greater theorisation on the advantages, implementation and
management of teleworkers amongst early adopters and where there is greater ICT usage – at
the level of either the industry or nation – then there will be more rapid adoption of all
teleworking practices.
24
Communication and contact increase opportunities for dissemination and elaboration of
teleworking knowledge. The extent of extra-organizational communication amongst
teleworkers and members of external organizations may increase the rate of up-take in the
same industry and or in related industries - eventually spreading to the level of the nation
state. Further communication and implementation leads to further theorization, in turn
leading to more abstract and elaborate knowledge which increases the diversity of
teleworking practices within an organization, industry and state.
Proposition 9d: Where there is greater theorisation on the advantages, implementation and
management of teleworkers amongst early adopters and where there is greater extra-
organizational communication amongst teleworkers and members of other organizations, then
there will be more rapid adoption of all teleworking practices.
Abrahamson (1996) argues that, at least in some countries, there exist societal norms or
expectations that managers will adopt the most efficient processes, structures and policies.
He labels this the norm of managerial rationality. He also argues that there exists in some
societies are norm of managerial progress: societal expectations that managers adopt new and
improved techniques. Given that there is evidence that there exist shared norms of
managerial behaviour within national (Hofstede, 1980) and industries (Spender, 1989;
Abrahamson and Fombrun, 1994), we might expect norms of management rationality and
progress to differ between industries and nations. Therefore, given that teleworking is a
relatively new practice and early adopters are motivated to explain the advantages and
processes of teleworking:
Proposition 9e: Where there is greater theorisation on the advantages, implementation and
management of teleworkers amongst early adopters and where there exist norms of
25
management rationality and progress at industry or national levels, then there will be more
rapid adoption of all teleworking practices within the industry or nation respectively.
Organizations, with the appropriate power, are able to change institutional standards for their
own benefit. Lawrence (1999) labels this process ‘institutional strategy’, which he argues
‘demands the ability to articulate, sponsor and defend particular practices and organizational
forms as legitimate or desirable, rather than the ability to enact already legitimated practices
or leverage existing social rules’ (pg 163). Lawrence outlines two forms of institutional
strategy: membership strategies to prescribe the definition of rules of membership in the
institutional community – that is defining what constitutes teleworking; and standardisation
strategies to prescribe the technical, legal or market standards that define normal processes
for that activity – that is defining the legitimate management and technological processes for
teleworking. We expect only large telecommunications organizations and large ICT or
software manufacturers have sufficient power, legitimacy and perceived technical knowledge
to enact institutional strategies for teleworking.5
Proposition 9f: Within a nation, where there is greater theorisation on the advantages,
implementation and management of teleworkers amongst early adopters and these early
adopters include large telecommunications organizations, ICT manufacturers or software
manufacturers, then there will be greater subsequent adoption of the teleworking practices
used by these organizations.
If early adopters are successful, or have created the appearance of success, then later adopters
will attempt to copy them, even in the absence of early adopters communicating knowledge
about teleworking (Kondra and Hinings, 1998). Haunschild and Miner (1997) outline three
forms of mimicry: frequency based mimicry, salience based mimicry and outcome based
26
mimicry. Frequency based mimicry occurs where an organization is influenced by the
number of organizations currently using a practice. Frequency based mimicry is more likely
to occur when an organization is an uncertain environment. Salience based mimicry occurs
where an organizations copies the practices of organizations that have certain traits, usually
size, success or status (cf. Porac et al., 1995; Kondra and Hinings, 1998). Environmental
uncertainty also increases salience imitation. Outcome based mimicry occurs where an
organization copies those practices associated with other organizations’ success. Outcome
based mimicry does not necessarily require access to early adopters’ knowledge concerning
the management and technological processes that link teleworking to successful
organizational outcomes. Instead, it can deduced from observing early adopters over a period
of time (cf. Teece, 1986). However, given that early adopters will be motivated to
communicate knowledge about teleworking, we do not expect knowledge generated by
observation of teleworking practices to have a large influence on the adoption of teleworking
practices.
Since frequency and imitation based mimicry are more likely to occur where the environment
is uncertain, where knowledge about teleworking has not been developed, we would expect
teleworking diffusion to be based on either the number of organizations in the same field that
adopt teleworking practices, or the presence of some historically large and salient
organizations in the field adopting teleworking practices. This observation is qualified in two
ways. First, mimicry is stronger within industries within the same region (Goodstein, 1994).
Therefore, we would not expect frequency or salience based imitation to spread across
industry boundaries to the level of the nation state as quickly, if at all, as outcome based
imitation based on communication. Second, these mimetic processes are likely to encourage
direct mimicry: that is the greater the current incidence of a particular form of teleworking,
27
the more likely that form of teleworking will be copied by other organizations. For example,
teleworking characterised by high knowledge intensity, high extra-organizational contact, low
intra-organizational contact and extensive use of ICTs is likely to lead to greater teleworking
with the same characteristics. However, we expect, we expect location and use of ICTs to be
the most influential factors in the mimetic process, since these are the most obvious surface
characteristics of teleworking (cf. early definitions of teleworking discussed above), and
therefore the most easily copied.
Proposition 10a: In the absence of early adopters’ theorisation and communication on
teleworking practices, subsequent adoption will be based on the frequency of earlier adopters
within a given industry, and teleworking will comprise the most prevalent location and ICTs
usage within that field.
Proposition 10b: In the absence of early adopters’ theorisation and communication on
teleworking practices, subsequent adoption will be based on the existence of an historically
large or successful organization adopting teleworking practices within a given industry, and
teleworking will comprise teleworking of the same location type and ICTs usage as that
organization.
As teleworking practices grow and become more institutionalised, regardless of whether the
diffusion is to communication by early adopters, frequency based imitation or salience based
imitation, organizations can gain legitimacy in the eyes of regulators, the labour market,
customers and other industry members by adopting practices that make them isomorphic with
their industry or country (Deephouse, 1996). Given it is likely at least some stakeholders will
have limited knowledge of teleworking, we expect that the salient features of teleworking in
terms of location and ICT usage will drive this desire to acquire legitimacy. Therefore, we
expect the penetration of teleworking practices defined by location and ICT usage within an
28
industry or country to have a direct effect on subsequent up-take of teleworking practices of
the same location type and ICT usage. We expect this effect to continue until either all
organizations use teleworking practices of the same location type and ICT usage, or the task
and institutional pressures for not adopting a particular form of teleworking outweigh the
legitimacy and task benefits for adopting that form of teleworking (cf. Deephouse, 1999). As
the number of adopters approach this theoretical maximum, we expect the rate of adoption to
decrease (Hagerstrand, 1952).
Proposition 11: The greater the number of organizations adopting teleworking of a specific
location type and ICT usage within an industry or nation, the greater the rate of subsequent
adoption of teleworking of the same location type and ICT usage within that industry or state
respectively, until the frequency of adopters begins to approach the theoretical maximum for
that field.
COERCIVE AND NORMATIVE PRESSURES ON LATER ADOPTERS
Earlier we argued that countries with lower population densities tend to have a greater
proportion of teleworkers (proposition 8a). However, the Republic of Ireland, Greece and
Spain have lower population densities compared with the UK, Netherlands and Denmark, yet
uptake is greater in these later countries (Tregaskis, 2000). There may then be other factors
that encourage or inhibit the adoption of teleworking. We consider these other factors to
correspond to normative and coercive institutional forces than affect later adopters more than
early adopters (Tolbert and Zucker, 1983, DiMaggio, 1988). These forces operate in addition
to task pressures and the mimetic and communicative processes described above. We
consider normative processes to operate at the level of the organization, industry and nation.
Since coercive pressures on teleworking are closely linked to labour market legislation, we
consider coercive pressures to operate mainly at the national level. We finish this section by
29
examining those circumstances in which these normative and coercive pressures have less
influence on later adopters.
Normative factors associated with organizaztions
Supportive organizational cultures are important for flexible working practices (Guest, 1990).
We then expect that the shared deep rooted mental models associated with organizational
cultures (Schein, 1992) exert a normative influence on the adoption of teleworking practices.
These normative influences may reflect assumptions on the most suitable organizational and
management processes for operating within the organization’s environment (cf. Johnson,
1987). We consider three elements of organizational culture to be important in teleworking
(Standen, 1997, after Quinn, 1988). These are the extent to which the following values are
shared by organizational members: a) the importance of flexibility, trust and openness; b) the
importance of expansion and adaptation; c) the important of tight bureaucratic control and
stability.
Where flexibility, trust and openness are valued, then we would be expected to move towards
teleworking practices in all locations for both low and high knowledge intensity workers (cf.
Standen 1997). A focus on expansion and adaptation is also likely to be associated with
teleworking, as managers may perceive teleworking as a competitive business tool to increase
flexibility and communication. The bias in such organizations may be towards the most
flexible forms of teleworking - such as high knowledge intensity, mobile teleworking,
especially with high extra-organizational contact. Where bureaucratic control and stability
are valued, then teleworking is less likely, as workers may be considered not to be
trustworthy off site. Low knowledge intensity teleworking especially may be very rare.
Where such teleworking does occur, it is likely to be only in home based or remote office
30
contexts, where outputs from workers can be measured more easily. High knowledge
intensity mobile teleworking with high extra-organizational contact may be supported in
some instances, although this may be limited strictly to circumstances in which travel is
perceived to be necessary for the attainment of organizational goals. Further, we consider
such organizations are less likely to experiment with radical working practices, because a
focus on stability may be associated with ‘paradigm stasis’, or an inability of organizational
members to perceive any rational efficiencies offered by teleworking (Kondra and Hinings,
1998, see also Johnson, 1987).
Proposition 12a: There will be more rapid up-take of all forms of teleworking practices in
organizational cultures characterized by values emphasising flexibility, trust and openness.
Proposition 12b: There will be more rapid up-take of high knowledge intensity, mobile
teleworking with high extra-organizational contact in organizational cultures characterised by
values emphasising expansion and adaptation.
Proposition 12c: Organizational cultures characterised by values emphasising control and
stability are less likely to adopt any forms of teleworking. Where teleworking does occur, it
will be limited, and confined to either low knowledge intensity home-based or remote office
teleworking, or high knowledge intensity mobile teleworking with high extra-organizational
contact.
Normative factors associated with industries
There is some evidence of coherent ideational cultures and shared mental models existing at
the level of the industry (Huff, 1982; Spender, 1989; Porac et al., 1989). Therefore, we
might expect teleworking to be predicted from reliable differences in organizational cultures
amongst industries. However, any coherence in these terms is likely to be mediated through
organizational cultures (see proposition 12). Nevertheless, we do expect collectives
31
associated with industries to exert an influence on the adoption of teleworking practices,
independent of organizational cultures. One such normative processes may relate to the
labour market for high knowledge intensity teleworkers. DiMaggio and Powell (1983) view
professionalisation as a collective effort of members of an occupation to establish legitimacy
for the collective wishes of that occupation (Larson, 1977; Collins, 1979). By virtue of the
greater power base engendered by owning scarce (cognitive) resources, groups of knowledge
workers within an industry are in a better position to push for the legitimisation of
teleworking practices for their occupation. We expect that such groups would prefer
teleworking that might be perceived to maximise their own quality of life – home based
teleworking. In part, this argument may explain the greater uptake of home based
teleworking practices amongst professional groups and knowledge intensive workers in the
UK (Gillespie et al., 1995). Given that professional groups also identify strongly with their
professional tasks (Mintzberg, 1979; see also Olson and Primps, 1984), we might also expect
groups of professional workers to push for teleworking practices that engender greater
flexibility in meeting task requirements – mobile teleworking. We expect further, that where
a professional group has already established legitimacy (e.g. lawyers, accountants), then,
should they so wish, it is easier for these groups of knowledge workers to push their
employers for access to teleworking schemes.
Proposition 13: There will be more rapid up-take of knowledge intensive home-based or
mobile teleworking in industries reliant on large groups of knowledge workers.
Normative and coercive factors associated with nations
One implication of the work of Hofstede (1980), and Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars
(1994) is that cultural analyses are necessary to understand adoption of management practices
in different nations. The available evidence suggests that this is true of teleworking, as
32
cultures exert a normative influence. There may be less teleworking in countries with
hierarchical and bureaucratic management cultures (cf. proposition 12c). One example is
France, where it is considered legitimate to exert direct control over subordinates (Barsoux
and Lawrence, 1994). Amongst the industrialised Northern European nations, France has
amongst the lowest incidence of teleworking (Tregaskis, 2000).
It appears that national culture not only influences the adoption of teleworking, but also the
form adopted. For example, Scandinavian organizations are more egalitarian and hence more
trusting of teleworkers (cf. Hofstede, 1980). The higher incidence of remote office
teleworking relative to home based teleworking in Sweden compared to the UK, may reflect
the generally more collective orientation of Swedish society, relative to the more individualist
orientation in British society (cf. Craipeau and Marot, 1984). In contrast, Durrenburger et al.
(1995) suggest that in German speaking countries, the system of vocational education has
explicitly fostered a ‘vocational ethic’ in which work is viewed as developing communication
skills, cooperation and creativity. Durrenburger et al. argue that teleworking is not favoured
in such a climate, as teleworking can exclude the social dimension of work (see also EIIR
1996, no 268). The similarity between Scandinavian and German speaking countries is that
both favour the social dimension of work. The contrast is that there are fewer other task,
normative or coercive pressures to encourage teleworking in German speaking countries.
First, population densities are higher (see proposition 8a). Second, in Germany, and the
USA, trades unions have opposed teleworking, particularly for low knowledge intensive
workers (Di Martino and Wirth, 1990). The differences between Scandinavia and the UK
reside not only in the greater individualism in the UK, but also changing societal aspirations
in lifestyles in the UK. In the UK, more knowledge workers are moving from cities to rural
areas for quality of life reasons (Gillespie et al. 1995). Given that knowledge workers have
33
greater power to push for teleworking (see propositions 6 and 13), then greater individualism
in some countries may mean it is more likely that home based teleworking will be preferred.
Proposition 14: Where other task, coercive or normative pressures favour all or several
teleworking practices, then there will be more rapid up-take of remote office working in more
collective cultures, but more rapid up-take of home based teleworking in individualistic
cultures.
In addition to national culture, legislation and government policy represent coercive
processes, that can either encourage or inhibit teleworking. For example, in the UK there is
governmental pressure, exerted through the Department of Trade and Industry, to bring
marginal groups (such as the disabled) into the workforce through home based teleworking
(cf. DTI, 1986; Gillespie et al., 1995), and in Germany, there are legal restrictions on the type
of work that can be conducted at home (IRS, 1996b). Further, teleworking seems to be
related to legislation concerning the protection and status of the self-employed. In Germany,
the self-employed enjoy less legal protection than the employed or unemployed, and there is
confusion in Irish law over whether teleworking constitutes self-employment or not. In both
cases, legislation concerning self-employment may have served, along with other factors, to
inhibit the growth of home based teleworking in Germany and Ireland (Tregaskis, 2000).
Whilst, much employment legislation and policy has been concerned with the unusual
circumstances of home based teleworking, home based and remote office teleworking can be
readily encouraged through transport policy. For example, Gillespie et al. (1995) lists
legislation and state government initiatives from several of the United States that either
encourage employers to set up teleworking schemes, or require state agencies to set up
teleworking schemes as means of reducing traffic congestion and improving the environment.
Clearly, traffic volume can be reduced through encouraging people to work from home or
34
establishing remote telecentres out of central business districts. Taxation can also be used to
encourage teleworking, especially in relation to the price of ICTs and telecommunications
usage. For example, the growth of teleworking in Denmark accelerated after the Danish
government, whilst high telephone charges in the Republic of Ireland may have inhibited the
growth of teleworking (European Commission, 1998). Clearly, reducing taxation on ICTs
will encourage a greater range of ICTs to be used, whilst Governmental attempts to reduce
telecommunications charges will encourage greater intra- and extra- organizational
communication especially.
Proposition 15a: Clear labour market legislation and Government policy concerning the
employment rights of home based teleworkers will influence more rapid up-take of home
based teleworking.
Proposition 15b: Transport legislation and policy aimed at reducing traffic volume will
influence more rapid up-take of home based and remote office teleworking.
Proposition 15c: Reduced taxation on ICT will influence more rapid up-take of all
teleworking practices, but there will be an even more rapid up-take of teleworking practices
characterised by high ICT usage.
Proposition 15d: Reduced telecommunications charges will influence more rapid up-take of
all teleworking practices, but there will be an even more rapid up-take of teleworking
practices characterised by high intra- and extra-organizational communication.
We also expect normative and coercive pressures to combine and interact with organizational
characteristics to predict the up-take of teleworking, especially with regard to societal
attitudes and legislation on child care provision for working parents, and particularly mothers.
Evidence indicates that home based teleworking is not a favoured option amongst women
(Huws, 1993), possibly because home based working leads to greater conflict between
35
parental and work roles, especially for mothers (Rowe and Bentley, 1991) and the importance
of separating work from home to maintain the self-identity in multiple roles (Standen et al.,
1999). Employees, and especially working mothers, may prefer an on-site creche to home
based teleworking. Employers on the other hand may see teleworking as a cheaper form of
family friendly employment policy than providing a creche (cf. Goodstein, 1994, Ingram and
Simons, 1995). The relative power between coercive and normative pressures from societal
and employee expectations and organizations’ ability to resist these pressures (cf. Oliver,
1991) is likely to determine whether home based teleworking is used as a family friendly
employment policy or not.
We would expect greater normative and legislative pressures for employer provision of child
care facilities to be countries with larger female participation rates in the labour force and
national cultures that emphasise equality between genders and where stereotypical gender
roles are blurred or non-existent (ie. the pole of femininity on Hofstede’s masculinity-
femininity dimension, 1980). In such nations, we expect that home based teleworking can be
seen as a compromise between these normative and coercive factors and organizational
resistance. Given the greater labour market power of knowledge workers in particular, we
would expect to see organizations avoiding home based teleworking in these national
conditions when: an organization has a high proportion of female knowledge workers; there
is low female unemployment; the organization can afford creche and other on-site facilities;
and there is a low diffusion of teleworking practices throughout the country so that employers
are likely to have less knowledge about the child care possibilities of teleworking (cf.
Goodstein, 1994, Ingram and Simons, 1995). Conversely, in such countries, we would expect
organizations to adopt home based teleworking in such nations when: the organization can’t
afford on-site facilities; there is high female unemployment; where the organization has a
36
high number of female low knowledge intensive workers but few female knowledge intensive
workers; and where there is a high diffusion of teleworking practices. Further, because
smaller organizations are less likely to be noticed by regulatory bodies and other stakeholder
groups (Goodstein, 1994; Milne and Blum, 1998), then they are more likely to seek to avoid
costly on-site child care provision.
Proposition 16a: In countries with strong normative and coercive pressures for employer
child-care provision, there will be greater low knowledge intensity home based teleworking
when there is high female unemployment and a high diffusion of teleworking practices, and
in smaller organizations within those countries with few financial resources and a high
proportion of female low knowledge intensive workers
In countries with low coercive and normative pressures for employer child care provision, we
might expect that home based teleworking will be seen as a family friendly policy. Here we
might expect to see home based teleworking adopted in those circumstances that promote on-
site child care facilities in countries with stronger institutional pressures. Most especially,
given better labour market power, this would apply to knowledge intensive work, and also
where there is a diffusion of teleworking practices, so that employers can develop knowledge
on the possibilities of teleworking in child care:
Proposition 16b: In countries with weak normative and coercive pressures for employer
child-care provision, there will be more knowledge intensive home based teleworking when
there is low female unemployment and high diffusion of teleworking practices, and in
organizations within those countries with a high proportion of female knowledge workers and
greater financial resources.
37
Non-conformity amongst later adopters
Given the mimetic, normative and coercive processes outlined here, we might expect later
adopters to become isomorphic in teleworking practices adopted within a give organizational
field (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). Whilst we would expect tendencies toward isomorphism
for many later adopters, in some circumstances we would expect diversity amongst later
adopters. Further, even in organizational fields where institutional processes are not
conducive to later adopters of teleworking practices, we might still expect some organizations
to follow earlier adopters.
One reason for diversity amongst later adopters will be imperfect transmission of institutional
processes, especially mimetic and communicative processes (Kondra and Hinings, 1998).
Whilst this would engender some diversity, given that errors in imitation or communication
are likely to be random, it is not possible to make any predictions. Organizational attempts to
align with the task environment serve as other more systematic reasons for adopting different
practices to other adopters. In some conditions then, we would expect later adopters to adopt
teleworking practices in the manner of early adopters, being influenced by the task processes
outlined in propositions 2 to 8. We expect one such condition to be in industries or nations
where task pressures are stronger and institutional pressures weaker (Scott, 1987; Oliver,
1997), for example in computer manufacturing or in more liberalised economies such as in
the USA. We would expect less diversity amongst later adopters then in more
institutionalised industries and sectors, such as accounting and the public sector, and in
relatively more regulated economies such as Germany. In environments with stronger task
pressures and weaker institutional pressures, we might expect there to be less clarity in the
norms for organizational processes and structures, but some clarity expectations that
organizations should be profitable and provide share holder wealth (cf. Kondra and Hinings,
38
1998). Therefore, organizations will have greater discretion over human resource
management practices (Goodrick and Salancik, 1996, see also Oliver, 1991), so can align
better teleworking practices with organizational strategy to enhance performance (Standen,
1997).
Proposition 17: Amongst later adopters, there will be greater diversity of teleworking
practices in organizational fields characterised by stronger task and weaker institutional
pressures.
CONCLUSIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH
In this paper, we have presented a framework to help understand the nature of teleworking.
This framework consists of five variables: location, IT usage, knowledge intensity, intra-
organizational contact and extra-organizational contact. This framework indicates research on
teleworking should take into account it’s multi-dimensional nature and that teleworking
practices can differ by degree on these five facets of teleworking. This entails developing
measures to assess the level of each component of teleworking. In developing such measures,
it becomes possible to check the empirical value of the framework, in addition to its
theoretical usefulness.
We used the framework and neo-institutional theory to develop a model of the adoption of
teleworking practices. By using neo-institutional theory, we hope to have shown how this
framework can help provide more detailed and subtle explanations of the incidence of
teleworking than has possible with previous conceptualisations of teleworking. Some of the
predictions made are unique for each component of teleworking, reinforcing the utility of a
multivariate approach to conceptualising teleworking. We also hope to have shown how our
39
model on the adoption of teleworking can help integrate previous research on the incidence of
teleworking, by building upon national, industrial and organizational analyses.
This analysis of the adoption of teleworking practices also indicates that studies in this area
need to take into account a variety of factors. Comparative survey research needs to analyse
the incidence of teleworking as a result of national, industry and organizational factors. In
addition, given that we expect the incidence of teleworking practices to influence the
subsequent incidence of teleworking practices and there to be differences between early and
late adopters, then incidence research should be ideally longitudinal to disentangle accurately
causal processes. Three level hierarchical linear modeling (Bryk and Raudenbush, 1992) is
one analytic technique that might prove especially useful for testing the propositions
advanced here. This technique is able to examine simultaneously the organizational,
industrial and national factors that influence organizational adoption of teleworking, whilst
recognising that organizations are nested in industries, which are in turn nested in national
cultural and legislative environments. Interrupted time series designs (Cook and Campbell,
1976) might also prove effective for examining how discrete changes in, for example labour
market legislation, influence subsequent up-take of teleworking in one country compared to
other countries. However, given that some of the propositions are derived from considering
intra- and extra-organizational cognitive and social processes (for example propositions 1, 3b,
9), we consider that another fruitful way of analysing the processes influencing the incidence
of teleworking is to use historical or case analyses (cf. Pettigrew, 1985; Johnson, 1987;
Spender, 1989; Dacin, 1997) to uncover the unfolding processes influencing the adoption of
teleworking within a given organizational field.
40
This paper has presented a framework for advancing understanding of telework. We hope
this framework can help move research in this area closer to a state of conceptual clarity, and
help researchers develop more powerful explanatory models than has been possible to date.
By achieving greater clarity and power in explanations, then it is possible to move beyond the
initial descriptive work that characterises much research in this area, and move towards more
sophisticated research devoted towards theory development and testing.
41
REFERENCES
ANDRIESSEN, J.H.E. (1991). ‘Mediated communication and new organizational forms’. In
C.L Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology. Chichester: Wiley.
BEHLING, O. (1998). ‘Employee selection: will intelligence and conscientiousness do the
trick?’ Academy of Management Executive, 12 (1), 77-86.
BOWMAN, C. and DANIELS, K. (1995). ‘The influence of functional experience on
perceptions of strategic priorities’. British Journal of Management, 6, 157-168.
BRAVERMAN, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the
Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
BREWSTER, C., HEGEWISCH, A. and MAYNE, L. (1994).‘Flexible working practices: the
controversy and the evidence’. In Brewster, C. and Hegewisch, A. (Eds) Policy and Practice
in European Human Resource Management. London: Routledge.
CALORI, R., JOHNSON, G. and SARNIN, P. (1992). ‘French and British top managers'
understanding of the structure and the dynamics of their industries: a cognitive analysis and
comparison’. British Journal of Management, 3, 61-78.
COLLINS, R. (1979). The Credential Society. New York: Academic Press.
COSTA, P.T. and MACCRAE, R.R. (1992). The NEO-PI-R Professional Manual. Odessa,
FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
CRAIPEAU, S. and MAROT J.-C. (1984).Telework: The impact on living and working
conditions. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions.
CROSSAN, G. and BURTON, P.F. (1993).‘Teleworking stereotypes: A case study’. Journal
of Information Science Principles and Practice, 19, 349-362.
42
DACIN, M.T. (1997). ‘Isomorphism in context: the power and prescription of institutional
norms’. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 46-81.
DANIELS, K., JOHNSON, G. and DE CHERNATONY, L. (1994). ‘Differences in
managerial cognitions of competition’. British Journal of Management, 5, Special issue,
S21-S29.
DEEPHOUSE, D.L (1996). ‘Does isomorphism legitimate ?’ Academy of Management
Journal, 39, 1024-1039.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY (DTI), INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
DIVISION (1986). Remote Work Units Project for Disabled People: Evaluation Study.
London: DTI.
DESS, G.G., RASHEED, A.M.A., MCLAUGHLIN, K.J. and PRIEM, R.L. (1995).‘The new
corporate architecture’. Academy of Management Executive, 9 (3), 7-20.
DI MARTINO, V. and WIRTH, L. (1990).‘Telework: An overview’. Conditions of Work
Digest, ILO, Geneva. 9, 3-35.
DIMAGGIO, P. (1988). ‘Interest and agency in institutional theory’. In L.G. Zucker (Ed.),
Institutional Patterns and Organizational Cultures and Environments. Cambridge MA:
Ballinger.
DIMAGGIO, P.J. and POWELL, W.W. (1983). ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional
isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’. American Sociological
Review, 48, 147-161.
DOUGLAS, M. (1982). ‘Introduction to grid/group analysis’. In M.Douglas (Ed.), Essays in
the Sociology of Perception. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
DURRENBURGER, G., BIERI, L., JAEGER, C., and DAHINDEN, U. (1995).‘Telework
and vocational contact’. Technology Studies, 2, 104-131.
43
FRAZEE, V. (1996).‘Support for telecommuting is on the rise’. Personnel Journal, 75 (10),
22.
GILLESPIE, A.E., RICHARDSON, R. and CORNFORD, J. (1995).Review of Teleworking in
Britain: Implications for Public Policy. London: Report to the Parliamentary Office of
Science and Technology.
GLOSSERMAN, B (1996).‘How green is my cyberspace?’ Japan Times Weekly
International Edition, 36 (44), 15.
GRANT, K.A. (1985).‘How Practical Is Teleworking?’ Canadian Datasystems, 17 (8), 25.
GRAY, M., HODSON, N. and GORDON, G. (1993).Teleworking Explained. Chichester:
Wiley.
GREENWOOD, R. and HININGS, C.R. (1996). ‘Understanding radical organizational
change: bringing together the old and new institutionalism’. Academy of Management
Review, 21, 1022-1054.
GUEST, D. (1990). ‘Human resource management and the American dream’. Journal of
Management Studies, 27, 377-397.
GURSTEIN, P. (1991). ‘Working at home and living at home: emerging scenarios’. Journal
of Architectural and Planning Research, 8, 164-180.
HAGERSTRAND, T. (1952). ‘The propagation of innovation waves’. Human Geography, 4,
3-19.
HACKMAN, J.R. and OLDHAM, G.R. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, Massachusetts:
Addison Wesley.
HAMBLIN, H. (1995).‘Employees' perspectives on one dimension of labour flexibility:
working at a distance’. Work, Employment and Society, 9, 473-498.
HAMPDEN-TURNER, C. and TROMPENAARS, F. (1994). The Seven Cultures of
Capitalism. London: Piatkus.
44
HANDY, C. (1995). ‘Trust and the virtual organization’. Harvard Business Review, 73 (3),
40-50.
HANDY, S.L. and MOKHTARIAN, P.L. (1996). ‘The future of telecommuting’. Futures,
28 (3), 227-240.
HANNAN, M.T. and FREEMAN, J.H. (1977). ‘The population ecology of organizations’.
American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929-964.
HOFSTEDE, G. (1980).Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-related
Values. London: Sage.
HUFF, A.S. (1982). ‘Industry influences on strategy formulation’. Strategic Management
Journal, 3, 119-130.
HUWS, U. (1993). Teleworking in Britain. Employment Department Research Series, No.
18. Sheffield: Employment Department.
HUWS, U. (1994). Teleworking. Brussels: European Commission.
ILO (1990). ‘Telework’. International Labour Office Conditions of Work, 9, (1).
IRS (1996a).‘Teleworking in Europe: part one’. European Industrial Relations Review, 268,
17-20.
IRS (1996b).‘Teleworking in Europe: part three’. European Industrial Relations Review, 271,
18-23.
JACKSON, P.J. (1997). ‘Flexibility and Rigidity in New Forms of Work: Individual Versus
Organisational Issues’. Paper presented at the European Association of Work and
Organizational Psychology Conference, Verona, Italy.
JOHNSON, G. (1987). Strategic Change and the Management Process. Oxford: Blackwell.
JOHNSTON, P. and BOTTERMAN, M. (1997). Status Report on European Teleworking:
Telework 1997. Brussels: European Commission.
45
KELLY, M.M. (1985).‘The next workplace revolution: telecommuting’. Supervisory
Management, 30 (10), 2-7.
KORTE, W. B., KORDEY, N. and ROBINSON, S. (1994). Telework Penetration, Potential
and Practice in Europe. TELDET Report No. 11. Bonn: Empirica.
LARSON, M.S. (1977). The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
LEIDNER, R. (1988). ‘Homework: A study in the interaction of work and family
organization’. Research in the Sociology of Work, 4, 69-94.
MCLENNAN, W. (1996). Persons Employed at Home, Australia. Canberra: Australian
Bureau of Statistics Catalogue No. 6275.0.
MEYER, J.W. (1994). ‘Rationalized environments’. In Scott, W.R., Meyer, J.W. and
associates, Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and
Individualism. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
MILGROM, P. and ROBERTS, J. (1996). ‘The LeChatelier principle’. The American
Economic Review, 86, 173-179.
OLIVER, C. (1997). ‘The influence of institutional and task environment relationships on
organizational performance: the Canadian construction industry. Journal of Management
Studies, 34, 99-124.
OLSEN, M. (1985). Office Work Stations in the Home. Washington DC: National Academy
Press.
OLSEN, M. (1988). ‘Organizational barriers to telework’. In Korte, W.B., Robinson, S. and
Steinle, W.J. (Eds), Telework: Present Situation and Future Development of a New Form of
Work Organization. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
46
OLSON, M. H. (1987). ‘Telework: practical experience and future prospects’. In R.E. Kraut
(Ed), Technology and the Transformation of White Collar Work. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
OLSON, M.H. (1989). ‘Work at home for computer professionals: current attitudes and
future prospects’. ACM Transaction on Office Information Systems, 7, 317-338.
OLSON, M.H. and PRIMPS, S. (1984). ‘Working at home with computers: work and non-
work issues’. Journal of Social Issues, 40, 97-112.
PFEFFER, J. and SALANCIK, G.R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations. New
York: Harper and Row.
PORAC, J., THOMAS, H. and BADEN-FULLER, C. (1989). Competitive groups as
cognitive communities: the case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers. Journal of Management
Studies, 26, 397-416.
POWELL, W.W. (1991). ‘Expanding the scope of institutional analysis’. In W.W. Powell
and P.J. DiMaggio (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
QUINN, R. (1988). Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing
Demands of High Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
QVORTRUP, L. (1998). ‘From teleworking to networking: definitions and trends’. In
Jackson, P.J. and Van der Wielen, J.M. (Eds), Teleworking: International Perspectives, From
Telecommuting to the Virtual Organization. London: Routledge.
RAMSOWER, R.M. (1985). Telecommuting: The Organizational and Behavioural Effects of
Working at Home. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press.
REGENYE, S. (1985). ‘Telecommuting’. Journal of Information Management, 6, 15-23.
REICH, R. (1992). The Work of Nations. New York: Vintage.
47
ROURKE, J. (1996).‘A few good tips for telecommuters and their employers’. Rural
Telecommunications, 15, 8.
SACKMAN, S.A. (1992). ‘Culture and sub-cultures: an analysis of organizational
knowledge’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 140-161.
SAMUELSON, P.A. (1947). The Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
SATO, K. and SPINKS, W.A. (1998). ‘Telework and crisis management in Japan’. In
Jackson, P.J. and Van der Wielen, J.M. (Eds), Teleworking: International Perspectives, From
Telecommuting to the Virtual Organization. London: Routledge.
SCHEIN, E.H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd edn). San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
SCOTT, W.R. (1987). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
SCOTT, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
SPARROW, P.R. and DANIELS, K. (1999). ‘Human resource management and the virtual
organization: mapping the future research issues’. In Cooper, C.L. and Rousseau, D.M.
(Eds), Trends in Organizational Behavior. Volume 6. Chichester: Wiley.
SPENDER, J.-C. (1989). Industry Recipes: An Enquiry into the Nature and Sources of
Managerial Judgement. Oxford: Blackwell.
STANDEN, P (1997).‘Home, work and management in the information age’. Journal of the
Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 3, 1-14.
STRANG, D. and MEYER, J.W. (1993). ‘Institutional conditions for diffusion’. Theory and
Society, 22, 487-511.
THOMPSON, M., ELLIS, R. and WILDAVSKY, A. (1990). Cultural Theory. Boulder:
Westview.
48
TOMASKOVIC-DEVEY, D. and RISMAN, B.J. (1993). ‘Telecommuting innovation and
organisation: A contingency theory of labor process change’. Social Science Quarterly, 74,
367-385.
TOWNSEND, A.M., DEMARIE, S. and HENDRICKSON, A.R. (1998). ‘Virtual teams:
technology and the workplace of the future’. Academy of Management Executive, 12 (3), 17-
29.
VAN OMMEREN, J. (1997). ‘Telework in Europe’. Paper presented to the Academy of
Management Meeting, Boston.
WARR, P.B. (1987). Work, Unemployment and Mental Health. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
WEBER, M. (1968). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology. New
York: Bedminster.
49
Table I. Hypothesised costs and benefits of teleworking.
Hypothesised individual benefits Hypothesised individual costs
more flexible working hours fewer chances for development or promotion , and the perception that
teleworkers are not valued by their managers
more time for home and family increased conflict between work and home
reduced commuting limited face-to-face contact with colleagues and social isolation
greater job autonomy routinisation of tasks
less disturbance whilst working more time spent working
chance to remain in work despite moving home, lower job securitybecoming ill or taking on family care roles
Hypothesised organizational benefits Hypothesised organizational costs
improved productivity difficulty supervising and motivating employees
improved employee retention increased selection, training and support costs
greater staffing flexibility difficulty socialising new employees to the organization
reduced office accommodation costs costs incurred in developing new planning and performance measures
greater resilience to disruption from extreme weather or earthquakes costs of additional information and telecommunications equipment
Hypothesised societal benefits
reduced pollution and urban congestion
provision of employment opportunities for rural areas
increased community stability
50
increased entrepreneurial activity
51
Table II. Types of telework and sample jobs.
High Knowledge Intensity Low Knowledge Intensity
Intra-Organizational Contact Intra-Organizational ContactHigh Low High Low
Location ICT usage Extra-Organizational Contact
Extra-Organizational Contact
Extra-Organizational Contact
Extra-Organizational Contact
High Low High Low High Low High LowHome-based
Low ICT usage
SalesManagers
Management accountant Lawyer Tran
slator
Phone operator Bookkeeper Phone sales Proofreader
High ICTUsage
Public relations Programmer
Financial analyst
IS developer
Customer enquiries
Secretarial/ clerical
Market research
Data processing
Remote office
Low ICT usage
SalesManagers
Management accountant Lawyer Translator
Phone operator Bookkeeper Phone sales Proofreader
High ICTUsage
Public relations Programmer
Financial analyst
IS developer
Customer enquiries
Secretarial/ clerical
Market research
Data processing
Nomadic Low ICT usage
Sales managers
Internal management consultant
Community nurse Architect
Service persons Bookkeeper
Sales representative Proofreader
High ICTUsage Engin
eer
Internal IT consultant
Auditor IS developer
Service persons
Secretarial/ clerical Delivery staff
Data processing
52
Figure 1. Factors influencing the incidence of teleworking activity.
(factors underlined and in italics represent aspects of teleworking)
Early adopter
Lateadopter
Mimicry
Elaboration of theories
on task & institutional
pressures
Communication of theories to establish legitimacy
Location, ICT use, Extra-organizational communication , abstract knowledge
TASK PRESSURES
National: geography
Industry: labour market - demands
Organizational: structure, change
National: legislation, culture & attitudes
Industry: Knowledge intensity, industry recipe
Organizational: culture/ paradigm
INSITUTIONAL PRESSURES
53
2 We are grateful to an anonymous referee for this observation.
3 We are grateful to Dr Kazutaka Kogi and Dr Makoto Takahashi, both of the Institute of Science of Labour, Tokyo, for these observations.
4 For example, British Telecom has a diverse array of teleworking practices, ranging from low knowledge intensity work with high extra-
organizational contact from workers’ homes or satellite offices, to high knowledge intensity mobile and home based teleworking, with high
intra- and extra-organizational contact and high ICT usage. Many of these practices are detailed in BT scientific reports, available from British
Telecom Network and Systems, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, IP5 7RE, United Kingdom.
5 As well as the high profile and well advertised teleworking schemes of large telecommunications and computer manufactures noted by Jackson
(1997), other indicators of the power of these organizations to enact institutional strategies are advertising campaigns for new ways of working
(BT, IBM, Canon) and sponsorship of academic teleworking research and conferences (e.g. BT, Haddon and Lewis, 1994, Jackson and van der
Wielen, 1998, e.g. IBM, Hill et al., 1998).
0