Checking in on the mobile office*

Up until now, companies had very few benchmarks to follow when it came to employee mobility programs. A new Runzheimer study aims to fill in the gap.

*This is an expanded version of a summary that originally appeared in the October 2006 issue of CAmagazine.

Mobile workers are growing in numbers every year, but only about half of companies have a specific policy for managing them, according to a Runzheimer International study.

The Total Employee Mobility Benchmarking Process is the first study of its kind to establish bases of comparison for mobile work programs – how long they have been in place, planned spending increases, security and liability and other factors. It focuses mainly on large US companies, many with operations in Canada.

"An important characteristic of leading organizations in the 21st century will be that they have developed effective and well-integrated employee mobility programs, including mobile office programs. Mobile office programs are a strategic imperative that enable business continuity, improved abilities to access and retain top talent, and far greater organizational agility. We are in a knowledge economy and should be anticipating the day when more than half of our workforce is able to function productively outside of traditional facilities. The benchmarking process that Runzheimer has begun is intended to help organizations benchmark and better manage their telecommuting programs as well as all aspects of employee mobility," says Heidi Skatrud, vice-president, Runzheimer International.

The study defines "mobile office employees" as those who spend at least 50% of their business hours away from their traditional office space – whether it be from home, on the road, from client sites, hotel rooms, airports and conference facilities.

The study’s researchers found that more than one-third of respondents (36%) expected to increase their spending on telecommuting programs this year, while 30% planned to maintain their current level and 30% were uncertain. Only 4% planned to reduce their spending in this area.

Similarly, 44% of respondents planned to increase their population of telecommuters, and 30% expected to keep it at its current level. Meanwhile, 22% were uncertain how this number is going to change, and only 4% reported that their number of telecommuters would decline.
Given these figures, it’s surprising to find that 65% of participants did not know whether productivity was higher for their mobile office employees. Only 23% said they believed (or had data to show) productivity was higher by an average of 23%.

More than two-thirds of respondents (77%) reported that their telecommuting programs are managed in-house. Only 23% said they outsource one or more functions of their telecommuting programs. When participants were asked whether they have plans to outsource their mobile office programs, 79% of organizations indicated that they planned to keep this function internal, 17% did not know, and 4% said they are planning to outsource some or all of their mobile office program components.

A full 72% of respondents expressed concerns about the security of company assets located off-site. But an even greater percentage (91%) said they had no program for inspecting mobile employees’ work environment.

Because telecommuting administration and management is in its early stages in most organizations, more than half (52%) of respondents reported that no single department had ownership over this function.

With regard to spending, most organizations said their mobile office employees are provided with (or reimbursed for) laptop computers and related software, cell phones, office supplies, printers, fax machines, phone cards, scanners and postage/courier expenses. Less than half said they do the same for desktop computers and related software, voice/data communications and PDAs or pagers.

Runzheimer plans to conduct the Total Employee Mobility Benchmarking Process again in 2007. For more information, please visit www.runzheimer.com/Web/COR/NewInitiatives.aspx.