Contents

Feature Special

IN and IP telephony interworking; Boning Feng ...... 101

Status

Kaleidoscope

Standards are still important!; Per Hjalmar Lehne .. 113

The physics papers of Tore Engset; Iver Brevik and Ivar Svare ........................................ 119

Index 1995 – 1999 .................................................... 126

At the age of 95 and into year 2000; Ola Espvik .......... 1

TelektronikkVolume 95 No. 4 – 1999ISSN 0085-7130

Editor: Ola EspvikTel: (+ 47) 63 84 88 83

Status section Per Hjalmar Lehneeditor: Tel: (+ 47) 63 84 88 26

Editorial Gunhild Lukeassistant: Tel: (+ 47) 63 84 86 52

Editorial Telenor AS,Telenor R&Doffice: PO Box 83, N-2027 Kjeller, Norway

Tel: (+ 47) 63 84 84 00Fax: (+ 47) 63 81 00 76telektronikk@telenor.com

Editorial board:Ole P Håkonsen, Senior Executive Vice PresidentOddvar Hesjedal, Vice President, Research & DevelopmentBjørn Løken, Director

Graphic design: Design Consult AS

Layout and illustrations: Gunhild Luke, Britt Kjus, Åse AardalTelenor Research & Development

Guest editorial; Tom Erik Julsrud ................................ 3

Telework research: Setting the scene;John Willy Bakke and Tom Erik Julsrud ...................... 4

SECTION 1: NORWEGIAN EXPERIENCES

The silent transformation of the workplace – Distri-bution of Norwegian teleworkers 1995 – 1998;Tom Erik Julsrud ........................................................ 10

Developing telework regulations;John Willy Bakke ........................................................ 22

SECTION 2: GENERAL ISSUES

Approaches to understanding teleworking;Leslie Haddon ............................................................. 29

Homework and boundary work; Birgitte Yttri ............ 39

Flexible work and health; Erik Bergersen .................. 48

Working with others: the virtual style;Dimitrina Dimitrova ................................................... 58

Telecottages and other work centre experiments;Walter Paavonen ........................................................ 64

SECTION 3: FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

Telework: complexity and life forms;Lars Qvortrup ............................................................. 69

Distributed teams and the individual: ICTs for dealing with challenges of new work arrange-ments; Sigmund Akselsen ............................................ 77

Telework and reduction of travel: Analysis of potential in two Norwegian conurbations;Tom Erik Julsrud ........................................................ 89

Epilogue – “Confessions of a would-be homeworker”;Lars Helljesen ............................................................. 96

For 95 years Telektronikk has presented devel-opments within telecommunication. Excitingyears I am sure they have been to all profession-als involved.

Since long ago the global telecommunicationnetworks became the most intricate and large-scale human inventions ever. And the complex-ity continues to grow! The objective has alwaysbeen to make any user able to communicatewith any other user no matter the location in theworld. Be it war or peace, diverse equipmentand networks, procedures, or age of equipment,cultural or political divisions – communicationshould make its way over the globe, space,oceans and land masses. Co-operation hasalways been a key issue.

Amazingly, it always worked! Because highlyskilled professionals did their job in a visionaryand responsible manner.

Such people write the articles you find in Telek-tronikk.

Telecommunication developments have alwaysmade great impact to the way we organise ourway of living – be it work or private family life.Looking back – and summing up – I dare con-clude that the telecommunication progress hascontributed to a better world. Let it be so – alsoin the future. Telektronikk will continue to ex-plain to you the telecommunication basics ofthat future.

Telektronikk portrays the achievements of Nor-wegian professionals and their international co-

operative partners. Our idea of presenting theirmaterial with an educational approach hascaught on. In fact, from all over the world!Outside demands for some feature editionshave occasionally reached unparalleled heights.Although such feedback has given those of usworking with Telektronikk a good feeling, noteverybody out there could possibly receive apaper copy.

To our readers: I hope you have benefited fromreading features addressing your personal areaof specialisation, and enjoyed looking into otherareas that are – believe me – as interesting asyours.

To our authors and guest editors: Thank you forproducing enlightening features and articles thateducate us and everybody else interested in thefascinating principles, structures, and develop-ments of telecommunications.

To our editorial board and Telenor: Thank youfor a mature philosophy and strategy behind theproduction of this publication – together withthe necessary funding – all vital components inmaking Telektronikk one of the few stable‘rocks’ to hold on to for professionals busilyproviding the world with new developments.

To our editorial staff: Thank you for an ex-tremely efficient way of producing this pub-lication over the years.

And to new contributors to future issues: Wel-come to our long list of skilled professionalswho experienced the feeling of making reallydifficult concepts understandable to others.The feeling was good!

Enjoy the rest of 1999 with this issue of Telek-tronikk, and happy new year 2000.

1

At the age of 95 and into year 2000

Telektronikk 4.1999

Ola Espvik, Editor

2 Telektronikk 4.1999

Telework has gradually beenimplemented in the language as aterm describing work conductedat a distance (from Greek: tele =distance) to the employee or reg-ular workplace, supported withinformation and communicationtechnologies (ICT). The concepthas its corresponding word inmost languages, and in theAnglo-American language tele-work is used together with termslike “distance work”, “telecom-muting” or “remote work”.

Although the term telework hasturned out to be difficult to definein a precise way, the ideaof working at a distance with thehelp of telecommunication toolsis not new, but has actually beena recurring theme at least sincethe beginning of the century. In1889 the popular science fictionauthor Jules Verne described thecollaboration between a news-paper editor situated in Paris, andone of his journalists located in USA in the book “One Day inthe Life of an American Journalist” (1889). As a communicationtool, they used a “screen medium” to talk to each other and todistribute written information.

Approximately fifty years later the famous mathematician Nor-bert Wiener in his book “The Human Use of Human Beings:Cybernetics and Society” (1954), speculated on how progressin the science of the information technologies could make thetransportation of the bodies redundant, as more work could bemanaged by distribution of information instead of matter. Heenvisioned how an architect could instruct the building of ahouse on the other side of the Atlantic Sea, using an “Ultrafax”,a device that “communicated information alone”. Wiener actu-ally stole a march on Nicholas Negropontes famous slogan of“being digital” when he stated that: “the bodily transmission ofthe architect and his documents may be replaced very effec-tively by the message transmission of communications trans-missions that do not entail the moving of a particular matter”.

Jules Verne and Norbert Wiener’s ideas sprung out of fascina-tion for the new technology of their time. But as the 21st centurycame of age, there were several social scientists and futuristicwriters who recognized how the information element seemed tomove in the forefront in the labor process, giving new opportuni-ties for conducting work at a distance. It also became more andmore obvious that computers and telecommunications weregoing to be absolutely central for the future work life, as well asalmost every other area of life. During the 1960s, 70s and 80s,the visions of a future society closely connected to the develop-ment of information and telecommunication technologies, wasmore thoroughly described by authors such as Daniel Bell, JohnNaisbit, Yoneji Masuda, Jack Nilles and Alvin Toffler.

In the early 1980s Alvin Toffler presented the probably bestknown scenario of a more telework-oriented society, in the book“The Third Wave” (1980). In his view the home would soon

appear as the place to work formost of us, due to the new com-munication technologies and net-works. In the 1980s his term ofan ‘electronic cottage’ becamethe symbol of the way telecom-munications would restructurethe work-life, and our privatelives as well.

These glimpses illustrate how“working at a distance with com-munication devices” for a longtime has been a fascinating ideain the borderline between popu-lar culture and more scientificwritings. The idea of movingwork to people, instead of peopleto work, has been a recurringtheme in this vision.

However, during the last 20 – 30years there has been a majorchange in this picture: As late asthe 1980s telework appeared as arather vague vision, associatedwith the futuristic movement of

its time. Now, 20 years later, telework no longer represents anabstract idea or a vague vision. On the contrary; to conductwork in other places than the traditional head office, with thesupport of communication tools, has become a daily habit formillions of employees in Europe, USA and other industrializedparts of the world. The typical jet-set journalist of our time,sending and receiving information back and forth to their editorwith the help of a lap-top and a modem, is in fact a materializa-tion of Jules Verne’s early vision.

For the telecom businesses this has of course meant a new andfast evolving group of customers, situated partly in the residentialand partly in the business markets. Meeting the demand of thisgroup is clearly a significant challenge for all telecommunicationoperators. For the researcher in this area, however, this has meantthat it has at last been possible to conduct empirical investigationsof larger groups of teleworkers, not only stand-alone case studies,theoretical discussions, and predictions. The impact of teleworkon the individual or implications for the larger society can now bestudied with a new set of real life evidences.

The articles presented in this volume reflect this importantchange, as they are all based on empirical research on telework-ers and their organizations. Analyzing the evolution of teleworkfrom a multitude of angles, the authors provide exciting insightsand reflections on how telework affects the individual and so-ciety, and vice versa. But even if the contributors are relatingtheir writings to genuine empirical findings, they are also givinghints on what the future workplace might look like. To me, thisbalance between present situation and future possibilities,appear as a fruitful and exciting approach to getting an under-standing of the phenomenon of telework.

3

Guest editorialT O M E R I K J U L S R U D

Telektronikk 4.1999

4 Telektronikk 4.1999

Telework has become a common elementin the public debate on the future of workover the last two decades. A brief look atthe literature shows that telework hasbeen proposed as a potential solution to along list of societal, commercial and indi-vidual challenges and needs, including:

• To make firms more attractive and‘family-friendly’;

• To reduce traffic congestion;

• To give individuals more flexibility intheir work;

• To reduce stress related to commuting;

• To strengthen local communities andfamilies;

• To provide work for employees inrural areas;

• To give disabled people better possi-bilities to join the labour market;

• To give enterprises access to employ-ees from other geographical areas;

• To reduce office expenditure;

• To reduce fuel expenses;

• To reduce air pollution;

• To facilitate concentration work.

This list is not comprehensive, but itillustrates how the topic of teleworkingrelates to different causes, interestgroups, and political camps. As there arearguments making telework interesting –or threatening – for individual employ-ees, organisational developers, environ-mentalist, transport planners, self-em-ployed and even unemployed, it is clearlymisleading to assume there is one tele-work debate. On the contrary, there areseveral debates with different partici-pants, problematics, and measures forwhat makes telework relevant, interest-ing, successful or even harmful.

In this introductory article we will givean outline of telework debates as well asfactors that have been central to the inter-est for this field, and some importantchallenges ahead. We will however firstpay some attention to the concept itself.

1 Coming to terms withtelework

The heterogeneity of the discussionsexplains to some extent the large numberof concepts that are used to describe thephenomenon. In addition to telework,terms like ‘telecommute’, ‘flexible

work’, ‘home office’, ‘distance work’ areoften used in a synonymous way, eventhough they may also refer to particularways of doing telework.1) Much efforthas been put into finding a single, unify-ing definition of telework (or whateverone prefers to call it), while others haveargued that it probably would be betterto introduce and strengthen a conceptualdifferentiation. In general it is recognisedthat it is probably impossible to agreeupon one single, precise definition. Weare still in the same situation as describedin a review some twenty years ago, whichstated that the concept is fuzzy, and thatit is even doubtful whether it is possibleto construct a definition, based on exist-ing conceptual and statistical categories(see Huws et al., 1990).

The fruitfulness of gathering such variedresearch themes under one definition willdepend on the chosen research questions.For a number of purposes, there are goodarguments for bundling together some-what varied work practices under oneoverarching concept like ‘telework’ sinceit is necessary to establish some commonunderstanding of the field before intro-ducing conceptual differences. In thiscollection of articles we take a pragmaticapproach to the question, recognisingfirstly that telework is a very broad con-cept, covering multiple ways of organis-ing work, and for several motives. Sec-ondly, we find that there are good rea-sons for establishing a general under-standing of the “core elements” in thediscussion. We will discuss this a littlebit further later on in this article. Thirdly,we argue that being explicit in a substan-tial sense when talking and writing abouttelework, is more important than a spe-cific chosen concept. This can preventtypical quasi-discussions where, forinstance, one party criticises home-basedwork dictated by the employer, while theother party defends voluntary teleworkone or two days a week.

What are the “core elements” in the con-cept? A central characteristic of tele-work, as we apply it here, is that it refersto work tasks performed on a distancefrom the premises of the employer. Thechosen work location may be the (tele)-worker’s home, or other places like atelework centre, a hotel room, a public

place, a car, or combinations thereof.Thus, the geographical distance is themost important aspect, not the particularlocation of work.

Bearing in mind that ‘telework’ refers tothe execution of work tasks is helpful fordistinguishing telework from related phe-nomena like ‘distance education’, ‘elec-tronic commerce’ and ‘teleshopping’.However, the borders between these con-cepts are not absolute. For instance, themuch debated merging of private andwork life makes it sometimes hard to tellif one is working or doing leisure activi-ties. In a similar way modern educationand working will often be intertwined inthe modern ‘learning organisation’. Thefocus on telework as ‘work’ should notmake one neglect the connections andintersections between work, educationand leisure.

The use of information and communica-tion technologies (ICT) like computers,modems and telephone-lines is oftenincluded in definitions of telework. Inour view ICT are important devices andtools helping the employee perform worktasks and communicate with employer,colleagues and customers, irrespective oftheir location. However, one should beaware of the fact that there are also non-technological solutions to this problem,like physical meetings, carrying books,papers and diskettes, and using the mail.Further, there may be periods when ICTtools are not used at all, or when there isa shift between old and new tools. In ouropinion one should be careful to hold toostrictly on to the criteria of using somespecific type of technology.

2 Why is telework (still)on the agenda?

What are the driving forces behind thestrong interest for telework? Firstly it isclear that developments within informa-tion and communication technologieshave been crucial for the interest, makingit possible to perform work tasks atalmost any chosen location, with com-munication technologies bridging geo-graphical distances. At least four recentimprovements should be highlighted inthis respect:

• Development of mobile communica-tions;

• Development of the Internet;

• Development of ISDN;

Telework research: Setting the sceneJ O H N W I L L Y B A K K E A N D T O M E R I K J U L S R U D

1) Norwegian concepts include fjern-arbeid, telependling, telearbeid, mobiltarbeid and distansearbeid.

5Telektronikk 4.1999

• Development of broadband telecom-munication networks.

‘Communication’ refers no longer pri-marily to audio-based communication,but includes communicating with elec-tronic documents, and with visual medialike videoconferencing. The rapid merg-ing of telecommunication and computertechnology during the last 20 years hasmade exchange and storage of electronicfiles a common characteristic of modernwork life. It is difficult to over-estimatethe importance of the shift from paper-based correspondence and archives intraditional organisations. If you areworking on the computer at your ordi-nary work place, and if you are using e-mail to exchange information, theoptions for performing work activitiesoutside a central office are good.

Of course, some occupations and worktasks depend on physical contact withcustomers and clients, for instanceemployees in hotels, hospitals, restau-rants, etc. However, the general trendseems to be that in a number of occupa-tions, more and more work tasks maybe performed at a distance from thepremises of the employer. A much citedauthor stated in the early eighties thattelework is particularly suited for thosewith a “low need for communicationtowards colleagues and managers”(Olson, 1989). As electronic mail andaccess to the Internet have become al-most omnipresent for most white-collarwork, this criterion is hardly that relevantanymore.

Technological development is but oneaspect that explains the renewed interestfor telework. A general change withinorganisational practises that supportmore flexible types of work is probablyequally important. This includes firstlymanagement ‘paradigms’ focusing onresults and mutual trust more than de-tailed work process control and workprocess location. Prominent examplesare project-based organisations and otherorganisational forms emphasising auton-omy for the participants, and manage-ment philosophies like Management byObjectives. Similarly, organisations thatwork in a global environment with a highdegree of co-operation between disperseddepartments tend to be positive towardtelework. This points to a more generalshift in the structure of the workforcewhere information-based work andknowledge-production becomes moreimportant than traditional industry (cf.

Bell, 1973; Lyon, 1988; Webster, 1995).This shift towards a knowledge economyis in itself a central motivating factor forthe increased use of telework. As morework becomes centred on the gathering,production or distribution of information,location becomes more irrelevant.

In addition to the organisational factors,aspects related to workers’ private liveshave also propelled the increasing inter-est for teleworking arrangements. Amajor change in many western societies,including Norway, is the growth offemale employers in the work force. Thedouble-income household has becomethe most common household structureduring the last 10 years, causing a needfor more flexible options at work. Theincreasing interest for more flexible workalternatives has been supported by house-hold surveys over the last years. Further,there are studies that stress the impor-tance of looking at work efficiency in abroader context which includes theemployees’ total ‘quality of life’ (VanSell, Jacobs, 1994; Dixon, Webster,1998). Thus, some enterprises have beenadvocates for less stressful working envi-ronments, with more time for familyactivities.

Finally, it should be mentioned that tele-work has been promoted strongly bycommercial interests like ICT dealers,furniture dealers, and others. During thelast years there has been a strong technol-ogy-push through a series of marketingcampaigns selling solutions for thehome-office, both to the residential andthe business market. This has probablyincreased the interest for trying out tele-work among enterprises and employeesalike.

3 Telework traditions– an overview2)

Turning to the academic discussions, thetheme of working at a distance has beenapproached with a multitude of perspec-tives and methodologies. The first sys-tematical studies were conducted in theearly seventies by researchers in Califor-nia. In a now classic study of the “tele-communication-transportation trade-off”(Nilles et al., 1976), telecommuting wasproposed as one solution for the oil-dependent western economies. Aided bycommunications technologies, the argu-

ment went, one might reduce road-basedcommuting by working one or more daysper week at home, or in a neighbourhoodtelework centre, thereby reducing traveland traffic congestion, in particular inurban areas. The focus here was on de-veloping predictions based on economicmodels. Later on, several pilot projectswere launched where work-related traveland fuel savings were investigated em-pirically (cf. JALA, 1990; Hamer et al.,1991; Kitamura et al., 1990; Mokhtarian,1991). The approach of seeing teleworkas a substitute for travelling is still anactive and important field. As a result,telework has been implemented in travelregulation plans in The Netherlands andin several states in USA (cf. Balepur etal., 1997; Mokhtarian et al., 1995; Hen-derson et al., 1996). Here, the economicsavings from a travel reduction will alsobe supplemented by other advantages,such as environmental benefits.

The travel-reduction approach to tele-working was soon supplemented by otherperspectives. During the 1970s, the ques-tion of re-locating work into the homeswas discussed as a major social innova-tion. Best-selling books like The ThirdWave (1980) by Alvin Toffler forecastthat the home would become the work-place of the future. The motivation forestablishing teleworking schemes washere linked to the “reunification” of thenuclear family and the development ofmore lively local communities. A num-ber of psychologists and sociologistswere now drawn into the field, makingtheoretical contributions and conductingcase studies. Most of these studiesproved to be rather sceptical, eithertowards the iedea, or towards the allegedbenefits of teleworking (cf. Renfro, 1985;Forrester, 1989). Some studies have alsoindicated that female teleworkers hadlower levels of education, lower generalincome and less flexibility in their workthan men (cf. Lie, 1986; Christensen,1987), and several feministically orientedsocial researchers formulated warningsabout how telework could represent a“female trap”.

The teleworkers’ social situation remainsan important issue, and much researchstill aims at exploring how teleworkinfluences the ‘life quality’ of theemployee and his/her family (Büssing,1998; Dixon & Webster, 1998; Van Sell& Jacobs, 1994), and how the boundariesbetween work and leisure are affected(cf. Haddon & Silverstone, 1994; Nip-pert-Eng, 1996).

2) This section builds on Bakke, 1997;and Julsrud, 1996.

6 Telektronikk 4.1999

During the 1990s the focus was increas-ingly put on the organisations that wereimplementing telework. Recognising thattelework is a question of organisationaldesign, the focus of many studies was onhow telework could (or should) be imple-mented in different organisations. Re-search in this field has also includedstudies on barriers to implementation,managerial styles, effect on workers’efficiency, and evaluations of properand improper ways of using the techno-logies.3)

The organisational approach has pro-duced a large number of handbooks,intended to guide managers and employ-ees on technological as well as moreorganisational questions for introducingtelework on a larger scale (see Gray etal., 1993; Nilles, 1998; Bakke et al.,1998). Viewing telework as part of anorganisational strategy has also intro-duced a whole new set of theoretical per-spectives. Contingency theory, actionresearch, media choice theory, social net-work theory, actor-network theory, aswell as general system theory are amongthe theoretical approaches that has beenapplied (cf. Qvortrup, 1998; Limburg,1998; Salaff et al., 1998; Julsrud & Ling,1997; among other sources).

Another set of studies, connected to theorganisational approach, has focused onco-operation within and between groupsconsisting of one or more teleworkers.Within the broad field of computer sup-ported co-operative work (CSCW) anumber of studies have explored tech-nologies and applications that supporttelework or influence the workgroup.Telework has in this respect also beenregarded as an element in “virtual organi-sations” or new production regimes,based on the exploitation of digital net-works and computers (cf. Igbara & Tan,1998; Harris, 1998).

A recent approach in studies of telework-ing has been the “workplace design-approach”. Authors like Becker andSteele (1994) regard telework as one partof a reorganisation of office workthrough the reorganisation of the physicalspace. While some see flexible officedesign as a way of working more ratio-nally and increasing co-operation, otherstend to regard it as simply a way of cut-ting costs (Becker & Steele, 1994; Duffy

et al., 1993). A related theme is theergonomic challenges raised by this newway of organising work (see Bakke,1997).

This brief overview of approaches tostudying telework shows that the theoret-ical perspectives have been broadened inscope. Today, scholars in academic disci-plines like economy, psychology, man-agement studies, sociology, architecture,media studies, transportation, geographyand informatics are all familiar with theterm telework, and they all give contribu-tions to the field. The subject is trulymultidisciplinary, and this has also beenreflected in variations in methodologicalpreferences and use of empirical resultswithin the various traditions.

It should be mentioned that the subject inquestion – telework – has been changingduring the last decades. In the study ofthe telecommunications-transportationtrade-off (Nilles et al., 1976), telework-ing centres, or ‘business centers’, wasgiven a prominent place, whereas home-based teleworking got less attention –although the authors referred to themedia awareness of home-based work.Alvin Toffler (1980) forcefully formu-lated the ideal of home-based telework-ing in what he called the electronic cot-tage. In later studies, home-based tele-working comes to the forefront, alone, orin combinations with office-based workand mobile teleworking (see Nilles, 1998;among other sources). The initial focuson full-time homework has also fadedin favour of more focus on teleworkingsome days a week. Thus, the term hasgradually been ‘adjusted’ to the waytelework actually is performed in today’sorganisations.

From its early beginnings, the discourseon teleworking has had an internationalorientation. The initial studies were donein the United States, but very soon theidea spread to other countries as well,while deploying the US, and later theBritish and Swedish experiences as in-spirations (see Huws et al., 1990; Het-land et al., 1989). Now, information pol-icy documents like “the BangemannReport” promote teleworking, and thegoal has been formulated to reach twomillion teleworkers in the EuropeanUnion by the turn of the century (Club deBruxelles, 1994). While being interna-tionally inspired, one also finds nationalcharacteristic traits. For instance, localteleworking centres, or ‘telecottages’ havebeen proclaimed as a Scandinavian solu-

tion, retaining the positive aspects of tele-working, like short commuting travels andpresence in the local community, whileavoiding perils like isolation or an un-favourable bargaining position relative tothe employer (see NOU, 1983:32; Hol-loway, 1994).

4 The contributionsin this volume

The motivation behind this current issueof Telektronikk has been to collect anumber of recent empirical and theoreti-cal studies of telework from authorsbased in several different countries. Thepresent papers demonstrate a variety offocuses, methods and goals. Based onwell-developed theoretical frameworksand on thorough empirical studies, theydemonstrate the necessity and fruitful-ness of building a mosaic of focusedstudies. Some articles studies individualexperiences, others networks of co-work-ers or larger organisational units. Whatthey all have in common, however, isthat they use empirical trials and experi-ences as a starting point for the discus-sion of the potentials and limitations oftelework as a future way of work. Unlikemuch of what is written on this topic dur-ing the last decades, these contributionsare exploring new flexible work forms ina systematic and critical way. They alsoshare a concern for the human aspectsrelated to teleworking. Even if the impor-tance of the new information and com-munication technologies is not neglected,the target interest is on the user, not thetechnology per se.

Section one in this volume includes twoarticles founded on Norwegian experi-ences with telework. Tom E. Julsrud dis-cusses the development of home-basedtelework in Norway in the period from1995 to 1998, based on household sur-veys conducted by Telenor Research &Development. The article reveals thatthere has been a growing interest for tele-work, measured both by the number ofarticles in the daily newspapers and byvarious official initiatives during theearly 1990s. This interest has howevernot been reflected by a growing numberof home-based teleworkers. The mostsalient change during the period is therapid growth in the teleworkers mediause, towards intensive use of electroniccommunication media. Based on the find-ings, the author discusses factors thatseem to stimulate and counteract the de-velopment of telework.

3) For an overview, see Huws et al.,1990; Jackson et al., 1998.

7Telektronikk 4.1999

In the second article in this section JohnWilly Bakke discusses the importance ofregulatory mechanisms for the practiceof telework, lacunae in existing laws andagreements, and the corresponding needto develop local telework agreements. Tostimulate the further development of tele-work as an attractive way of organisingwork, he argues, national and interna-tional regulatory frameworks have to bebrought forward. In the article, a Norwe-gian telework development project is pre-sented, where the development of regula-tory mechanisms has been central.

In the second section of this volume,general issues, we leave the nationallevel and present a set of articles thatcover central themes in the debate ontelework in society.

Leslie Haddon starts his article “App-roaches to understanding telework” bypresenting some major approaches to thefield, as well as issues usually consideredwhen defining telework. Based on inter-views with 20 UK households, he thenshows how the experience of telework isshaped by motivation, status of teleworkin the home, and the use of informationand communication technologies. Look-ing at the dynamics of telework overtime, he points to a number of different‘trajectories’ that lead employees andself-employed into – and out of – tele-working arrangements.

The experience of being a teleworker isfurther explored by Birgitte Yttri in herarticle “Homework and boundary work”.Using sociological cognitive theory, sheanalyses how 10 Norwegian teleworkersactively construct their private bound-aries between home and work. Applyingthe conceptual framework of ChristinaNippert-Eng, she shows how the tele-workers can be considered as beingeither ‘integrators’ or ‘segmentators’,depending on how they organise theirprivate and work life. Much like the for-mer article, she points at the dynamicsinvolved in the personal experience ofteleworking over time, indicating that theboundaries are not static, but an issuethat is constantly being reworked by theindividuals.

As flexible work forms becomes a morecommon and accepted way of working,an important task is to explore how thismight affect the employees’ health. In thearticle “Telework and health” Erik Berg-ersen shows how a range of studies havedocumented a clear connection between

psycho-social factors, such as controlover work-tasks and social support andobserved health effects. Based on thesefindings, he discusses how telework inthe future should be developed to avoidnegative health effects for the individualemployee.

Turning to the characteristics of theworking group, Dima Dimitrova exploreswork situations and work relations thatappear more or less suitable for telework.Based on a larger qualitative study ofCanadian teleworkers, she contrastshighly interconnected groups of workers,with more loosely connected networks.Applying social network analysis, shediscusses differences in communicationpatterns and working style among thedifferent ‘networks’, focusing on the pos-sibilities for teleworking. To understandthe future development of telework, sheargues, it is important to understand thecombinations of these different types ofnetwork within organisations and enter-prises.

In the last article in this section, we moveour focus from the organisation to thestrategic use of telework to developregional labour markets. In the early1980s the first trials with telework cen-tres were launched in rural parts of Swe-den. In the article “Telecottages andother telework experiences” WalterPaavonen analyses the pioneering workthat took part in the first telework centrein Nykvarn, as well as other initiatives.As newcomers to the field of telework-ing, we today face new initiatives inareas like resort offices and office shar-ing. There are several lessons to learnfrom these early trials, he argues.

The final section of this volume – out-looks and opportunities – focuses onthe potential implications of telework, ifapplied more systematically and on alarger scale in society.

Lars Qvortrup regards telework as astrategy applied by modern organisationsto handle high levels of complexity, aswell as a tool for private families to han-dle their complex daily routines. Draw-ing on results from trials in the privateand public sectors in Denmark, Qvortrupdivides the teleworkers into three sub-groups (electronic homework, telecom-muting and flexiwork) which, he argues,roughly correspond to different lifeforms. According to his investigations,the typical teleworker seems to display a‘career life-form’, more than ‘the wage

earner’, or ‘the self-employed’. In thelast part of the article, Qvortrup uses thistheoretical framework to discuss howtelework will appear in future ‘hyper-complex organisations’.

The virtual organisation is the subject fornext article, “Distributed teams and theindividual” by Sigmund Akselsen. Ana-lysing some of the typical challenges fornetwork-based organisations and dis-tributed work teams, he argues that dif-ferent technologies and applications canbe applied to meet new demands. Usertrials with electronic teamrooms andother applications indicate that the coreproblems of higher thresholds to commu-nication and lesser visibility of work canbe handled successfully by creating a‘virtual proximity’.

As telework becomes a more commonopportunity among employees, the poten-tial for substituting traditional road-basedcommuting with telecommuting in-creases. In the article “Telework andreduction of travel: Analysis of potentialin two Norwegian conurbations” by TomE. Julsrud, two scenarios for the year2010 are presented, where the number ofregular homeworkers reaches 10 and 20percent respectively. Based on these sce-narios, the potential reduction of worktravel in two Norwegian conurbations isestimated, and the role of telework as ageneral strategy for traffic reduction isdiscussed.

The epilogue is written by Lars Hell-jesen, an advisor who has experiencedthe pros and cons of home-based workfor a period of time. From a personalpoint of view he contemplates the differ-ences between telework theory and prac-tice, when the home office constantly isbeing invaded by his 3-year old son.

5 Implications for furtherresearch

A central theme in this introduction isthat telework constitutes a part of severalagendas, both political, private andstrategic ones, making telework an inter-esting and challenging field of research.This is also the reason why teleworkresearch cannot be expected to follow asingle line of development, based on aunifying scientific framework. Thus, de-velopments in the area of teleworkresearch point in different directions.Telework is introduced for several rea-sons, and sometimes for reasons that may

8 Telektronikk 4.1999

be internally conflicting. However, somegeneral objects appear as important, andin the conclusion of this introduction wewill point at some major challenges inthe years ahead.

First, there is a need to systematise andintegrate research that has been and isdone on a national and an internationallevel. Further, telework is a part of thegeneral trend towards globalisation of thelabour markets. National economies,laws and regulations are challenged bymultinational and international compa-nies, employing workers from all parts ofthe world. In this respect it is importantto try to analyse the impact of the emer-gent globalism on working practices, aswell as similarities and differencesregarding how telework is implementedand utilised in different settings and cul-tures. During the last years, importantinitiatives have been taken to measurethe distribution of telework in large-scaleEuropean surveys (Korte, Wynne, 1996;European Commission, 1998). The inte-gration of present studies and the estab-lishing of international research shouldclearly be further developed.

Secondly, there is still a lack of theoriesthat help to explain and synthetise re-search findings. Telework is a field ofresearch with a lot of separate studies,with only few references to each other.On the one hand, future research shouldtry to see how telework fits into existingbodies of theories on eg. technologicalchanges at the workplace, structuralchanges, organisational developments,media choice, etc. On the other hand, itwould be helpful to develop genuine the-ories of telework to understand more ofthe dynamics in the development of tele-work. Some recent publications havestarted this work, trying to incorporatetelework into more general frameworksof social sciences and theories of work(Jackson & van der Wielen, 1998; Jack-son, 1999).

There is a large literature on teleworking,both paper-based and on the Internet. Toa large extent, this literature has a pro-teleworking bias, often in mixtures ofdescriptions and prescriptions, the major-ity being simple assertions of the possi-bility of teleworking. The lack of studiesaccording to academic standards moti-vates the continued need for theoreticaland empirical studies. We hope that thecontributions in this volume representsteps ahead for this exciting field.

Literature

Bakke, J W. 1997. The ergonomics ofteleworking. Telektronikk, 93 (3/4),78–89.

Bakke, J W et al. 1998. Håndbok i fjern-arbeid. Oslo, Arbeidsmiljøforlaget.

Balepur, P N, Varma, K V, Mokhtarian,P L. 1997. Transportation impacts ofcenter-based telecommuting: Interimfindings from the neighbourhood Tele-centers Project. Transportation, 25,287–306.

Becker, F, Steele, F. 1994. Workplace bydesign. Mapping the high-performanceworkscape. San Fransisco, Jossey-BassPubl.

Bell, D. 1973. The coming of post-indus-trial society. New York, Basic Books.

Büssing, A. 1998. Telework and qualityof life. In: Teleworking: Internationalperspectives. Jackson, P, VanVielen(eds.). London, Routledge, 144–165.

Christensen, K. 1987. Impacts of com-puter-mediated home-based work onwomen and their families. Office: Tech-nology and people, 3, 211–230.

Dixon, T L, Webster, J. 1998. Familystructure and the telecommuters qualityof life. Journal of End User Computing,Fall 1998, 42–49.

European Commission. 1998. Statusreport on European telework. Luxem-bourg, Office of the official publicationsof the European communities.

Duffy, F et al. 1993. The responsibleworkplace. Oxford, Butterworth Archi-tecture.

Forester, T. 1989. The myth of the elec-tronic cottage. In: Computers in thehuman context. Forester, T (ed.). Lon-don, Basil Blackwell.

Garrison, W L, Deakin, E. 1988. Travel,work, and telecommunications : A viewof the electronics revolution and itspotential impacts. TransportationResearch, 22A (4), 239–245.

Graham, S, Marvin, S. 1996. Telecom-munications and the city. London, Rout-ledge.

Gray, M et al. 1993. Teleworking ex-plained. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.

Haddon, L, Silverstone, R. 1994. Tele-working in the 1990s : A view from thehome. University of Sussex. (SPRU/CICT Report Series, No. 10.)

Hamer, R, Kroes, E, van Oostroom, H.1991. Teleworking in Netherlands : anevaluation of changes in travel be-haviour. Transportation, 18, 365–382.

Harris, M. 1998. Rethinking the virtualorganisation. In: Teleworking: Interna-tional perspectives. Jackson, P, VanVie-len (eds.). London, Routledge, 74–92.

Henderson, D K, Koenig, B E, Mokh-tarian, P L. 1996. Using travel diary datato estimate the emission impacts of trans-portation strategies: The Puget SoundTelecommuting Demonstratuion Project.Journal of the Air & Waste ManagementAssociation, 46, 47–57.

Hetland, P et al. 1989. Nært, men likevelfjernt. Telematikk og lokal utvikling. Sta-vanger, Rogalandsforskning. (RF-rapport123/1989.)

Holloway, L. 1994. Telecottages, tele-working and telelearning. Stockholm,Teldok. (Teldok Report 90E.)

Huws, U. 1988. Remote possibilities:Some difficulties in the analysis andquantification of telework in the UK. In:Telework : Present situation and futuredevelopment of a new form of work orga-nization. Korte, W B et al. (eds.). North-Holland, Elsevier Science Publishers BV.

Huws, U, Korte, W B, Robinson, S.1990. Telework : Towards the elusiveoffice. West Sussex, Wiley.

Jackson, P, van der Wielen, J (eds.).1998. Teleworking : International per-spectives. London Routledge.

Jackson, P (ed.). 1999. Virtual working.London, Routledge.

JALA Associates. 1990. The CaliforniaPilot Project, final report. Los Angeles,JALA Associates.

Julsrud, T. 1996. Teleworking : Thevision. An historical view of theories andtrends. Telektronikk, 92 (1), 16–25.

Julsrud, T, Ling, R. 1997. The Goretexprinciple : The ‘hytte’ and mobile tele-

9Telektronikk 4.1999

phones in Norway. Kjeller, TelenorR&D. (R&D report R 7/97.)

Kitamura, R et al. 1990. Telecommutingas a transportation planning measure :Initial results of California Pilot Project.Washington DC, Transportation Re-search Board, National Research Coun-cil. (Transportation research record1285.)

Korte, W B, Wynne, R. 1996. Telework.Penetration, potential and practice inEurope. Amsterdam, IOS Press/Ohmsha.

Lie, M. 1986. Er ny teknologi veien tillikestilling? In: Revolusjonen som for-svant? Sørensen, K H, Schiefloe P M(eds.). Oslo, Universitetsforlaget,134–146.

Limburg, D. 1998. Teleworking in amanagerial context. In: Proceedings ofthe third international Workshop onTelework, Turku, September 1998,93–106. (TUCS General Publications.)

Lyon, D. 1988. The information society.Cambridge, Polity Press.

Mokhtarian, P. 1991. Telecommutingand travel : state of the practice, state ofthe art. Transportation, 18, 319–342.

Mokhtarian, P, Handy, S, Salomon, I.1995. Methodological issues in the esti-mation of the travel, energy, and air qual-ity impacts of telecommuting. Trans-portation Research, 29, (4), 282–302.

Nilles, J et al. 1976. The telecommunica-tions-transportation tradeoff. New York,John Wiley.

Nilles, J. 1998. Managing telework. NewYork, John Wiley & Son.

Nippert-Eng, C. 1996. Home and work.Negotiating boundaries through every-day life. Chicago, The University ofChicago Press.

NOU. 1983. Telematikk. Teleutvalgetsutredning nr. 2. Oslo, Ministry of Trans-port. (Norges offentlige utredninger;1983:32.)

Olson, M H. 1989. Telework : Effects ofchanging work patterns in space andtime. In: Information Society and SpatialStructure. Ernste, H, Jaeger, C (eds.).London, Belhaven Press.

Qvortrup, L. 1998. From teleworking tonetworking : definitions and trends. In:Teleworking: International Perspectives.Jackson, P J, van der Wielen, J M (eds.).London, Routledge, 21–39.

Renfro, W L. 1985. Second thoughts onmoving the office home. In: The Infor-mation Technology Revolution. Forester,T (ed.). London, Blackwell.

Salaff, J W, Wellman, B, Dimitrova, D.1998. There is a time and place to tele-work. In: Proceedings of the third inter-national Workshop on Telework, TurkuSeptember 1998, 11–30. (TUCS GeneralPublications.)

Toffler, A. 1980. The third wave. NewYork, Pan Books.

Van Sell, M, Jacobs, S M. 1994. Tele-commuting and quality of life : A reviewof the literature and a model for research.Telematics and Informatics, 11 (2),81–95.

Webster, F. 1995. Theories of the infor-mation society. London, Routledge.

Tom Erik Julsrud (34) is Social Scientist and has beenworking at Telenor R&D since 1994. He has been doingresearch on homeworking, flexible work, workplace devel-opment and telecommunications and sustainability. He isco-author of the book “Den elektroniske nomade: MedMarshal McLuhan som guide langs den digitale landevei”.

email: tom-erik.julsrud@telenor.com

John Willy Bakke (44) is Research Scientist at TelenorR&D, Kjeller. His research interests include teleworkingand other flexible work arrangements, as well as the moregeneral theme of social aspects of information and commu-nication technologies.

email: john-willy.bakke@telenor.com

10 Telektronikk 4.1999

1 The tracing of a socialinnovation

Telework is often presented as a conse-quence of rapid diffusion of new commu-nication technologies at the workplace, inthe homes, or – more recently – due tothe fast development of the Internet. It istrue that technological progress is at thecore of the concept, and also provides animportant driving force behind the devel-opment of homework and other types oftelework. As argued in a typical commer-cial by an ISDN supplier: “With an ISDNconnection you don’t have to go to theoffice every time you need to work”.1)

However, several researchers have dur-ing the last 30 years or so, warned usagainst a strong belief in technology as adeterministic force in social change (seeWilliams, 1974; Winner, 1985; Feenberg,1991; Mackay, 1995). The broad fieldlabeled “social shaping of technology”stresses on the contrary that social forcesare crucial in the development of a newtechnology and how it is adopted by theusers. This last point is highly relevant tothe discussion on telework: Use of infor-mation- and communication technology(ICT) is – at least in most cases – not anend in itself for the employees who de-cide to work at a distance, but somethingthat helps them reach one or more goals.A decision to work at home could, forinstance, be made as a response to a longcommuting distance, or a need to work inmore peaceful surroundings. This insight,as simple as it might be, underpins ahuman centered approach towards tele-work, where it is treated as a social,rather than a technical innovation.

The aim of this paper is to give an up-dated overview of telework and tele-workers in Norway. The empirical coreof this work is a small survey of the Nor-wegian households conducted by TelenorR&D during the years 1995, 1997 and1998. This statistical analysis includes asample of 29 full time homeworkers, 180part time homeworkers and 443 mobileworkers, and it provides exciting infor-mation on how Norwegians use theirdomestic technologies and how they tendto organize their work and leisure activi-ties. The issue I will put forward in thisarticle, however, is not only who the Nor-wegian teleworkers are, but I will also tryto shed some light on how the phe-

nomenon of telework has developed, andwhat have been the central factors behindthe development. Even if the data onlycover a small time span, from 1995 to1998, it is nevertheless a rare opportunityto trace the development of teleworkover time. The intention is that observa-tions here should relate to a more generaldiscussion on how we might understandthe phenomenon of telework as a socialinnovation, and thus how it is develop-ing in modern societies.

Since telework is a social innovation, itis also a cultural phenomenon, driven bythe common understandings and ideasof a community of people. Thus, tele-work should be studied with referenceto the specific social environment it isapplied to. In this article I will first out-line the way telework has been presentedin Norway since the concept caught theinterest of the social researchers. It isimportant to note that this is a very briefand also highly subjective presentation.The idea is however that this brief his-tory-line will provide me with a startingpoint, and help raise some “guidinghypotheses”. These hypotheses raise theframework for the discussion of the coreresults from the three small surveys. Myfocus here will be different types ofhomework and to some degree mobilework. In the last section, I will discusshow the results from the surveys can berelated to the way it has been treated inpublic discussions, and what we canexpect of telework in the years ahead.

2 Teleworking theNorwegian way

The modern vision of telework was bornon the west coast of the United States inthe early 1970s, when the westernnations were forced to cut their oil con-sumption due to the oil crisis in the Mid-dle East. Prominent researchers, such asJack Nilles and John Harkness conductedestimates of the potential savings possi-ble by giving way to teleworking forparts of the labor force. It was stated thatfor every percent of the workforce whobecame teleworkers, the US saved 5.4billion barrels of oil per day (Nilles et al.,1976; Huws et al, 1990). In this earlyvision, the primal advantage of telework-ing was the reductions in money spent onoil and gas. When the idea of telework-ing reached Norway in the early 1980s ithad, somewhere on the way, undergonean interesting transformation: The ess-ence of the concept was more or less the

same; people were going to work at adistance with the support of telecommu-nication and information technology, butthe central objective was no longer thereduction of oil and gas, but the develop-ment of regional labor markets. In a re-port from the Norwegian governmentpublished in the early eighties outliningthe future consequences of telecommuni-cations in the society, teleworking is forthe first time discussed in an official doc-ument (NOU, 1983). Here, homeworkand local neighborhood offices (“telema-tikksentra”) are viewed as the two con-trasting types of telework. While thereport is sceptical towards homework forits potential deterioriation of the individ-ual workspace and lack of contact withcolleagues, regionally based neighbor-hood offices are highly recommended:

“Local neighborhood offices of vary-ing size may be considered. Suchoffices could be placed in the regionsand could serve as a means for region-al and employment policies (...) Theremay be great potential in co-localizinggroups of similar work or whole orga-nizational units in local neighborhoodoffices which are physically separateand have a geographical distance tothe rest of the company or organiza-tion they are part of.” (page 71)

The point is further elaborated in a laterchapter describing “teleworking in theyear 1998” in two futuristic scenarios.While the home-office is concerned withconstraints on the individual, the neigh-borhood office is described in a morepositive scenario, marked by renewalof local industries. In general, teleworkis perceived as a way of moving the jobsfrom the cities to the regional areas. Thisis combined with a focus on local neigh-borhood offices instead of home-work-ing. Thus, in the Norwegian discussion,telework on the one hand shifted its con-tent from homework to neighborhoodoffices in the regions. On the other hand,it changed its purpose from fuel savingsto regional employment.

This shift of focus illustrates a more gen-eral point to be made on the introductionof telework as a social innovation: theidea itself seems to be closely connectedto the present historical and political con-text. While the crisis in the Middle Easttriggered the initial research in USA,there was another political agenda inNorway in the early 1980s. The regionaldimension has solid roots in several po-litical parties in Norway since the begin-

The silent transformation of the workplace Distribution of Norwegian teleworkers 1995 – 1998T O M E R I K J U L S R U D

1) Advertisement for Alcatel STK, Tele-kom revy, 19/97. (My translation.)

11Telektronikk 4.1999

ning of the century and it became a cen-tral element in how telework was “framed”in the Norwegian discussion (Rokkan,1967).2) Much like popular trends inorganisaional development, the idea oftelework seemed to have travelled aroundthe world and been implemented in acc-ordance with local political agendas and‘mental frameworks’.3)

Since the 1980s the regional dimensionof the telework discussion in Norway hasbeen supplemented by several others.After a period of remarkable silence onthe topic, the interest for teleworkingblossomed during the 1990s. The discus-sion of the potential impact of informa-tion and communication technology(ICT) on society was suddenly moresound. European initiatives were madeto promote teleworking, and the Clinton-Gore initiative for an information super-highway opened the way to a broaderdiscussion on the topic of telework. Animportant national statement from theNorwegian government came with thereport “Den norske IT-veien bit for bit”which appeared to be inspired by theEuropean Bangemann report (cf. Bakkeet al., 1997). Telework was here recom-

mended as a way of building the IT net-works to provide benefits for businessand industry (Ministry of Communica-tion and Transportation, 1996). This doc-ument was followed up in 1998 in thereport “Norge – en utkant i forkant” fromthe Ministry of Trade and Industry. Inthis report we meet a slightly more busi-ness oriented and careful approach:

“Whenever required, businessesshould in a good and secure mannerbe able to establish telecommuting asan appropriate form of work.” (Min-istry of Trade and Industry, 1998.)

The underlying point is the commonview in the political milieu that the Nor-wegian economy had become too depen-dent on oil resources. The traditional on-shore business lacked initiative, and thedevelopment of IT-related businessappeared as a major source for economicrenewal. In this context, telework app-eared as a way to make efficient use ofthe investment in technological equip-ment and infrastructure. From a politicalpoint of view, it seemed like teleworkinghad shifted its orientation from theregional dimension, towards the moregeneral economic interests. Probablydue to the lack of any successful imple-mentation of local neighborhood centers,the content was now undoubtedly in thedirection of working from home.

2.1 The public interest

An increasing interest for the themebrought new groups into the discussionduring the early 1990s. The discussion oftelework was little by little lifted out ofthe universities and research institutionsand adopted by organizations and interestgroups in the labor marked. The Norwe-gian Federation of Trade Unions (LO)published a leaflet on the topic, otherunions produced statements that sup-ported – or banned – teleworking amongtheir members. PC dealers and telecombusinesses marketed their product assolutions for the homeworkers, and localseminars were held to discuss the prosand cons of telework. A small and enthu-siastic guide to homebased teleworkerswas published, promoting homework forthe growing segment of self-employed(Hoksnes et al., 1991).

Obviously, the general distribution ofPCs, ISDN connections and the Internetin the population acted as an importantdriving force behind the general interestfor alternative work forms. The Norwe-gians have, after all, a tradition forchoosing the high-end solutions whenthey buy their domestic technologies, andthe household income has increased dur-ing the period.4) Partly as a spin-off fromthe interests for technological applica-

2) Jarle Brosveet (1997) has used theconcept “translation terrain” todescribe the historical setting that pro-vides the backdrop for the way tech-nology is implemented. He writes: “theNorwegian or translation terrain con-sists in large part of regional senti-ments which have pervaded the coun-try’s cultural and political past forcenturies. Often, these “grassrootsversus elite”sentiments have beentermed parochial, meaning that theyrepresent the attempts of the ruralpopulation to propagate local rulewhich focuses on elements of popularprotest. These elements stress anti-bureaucratic, anti-centralist and anti-governmental values.”

3) Kjell Arne Røvik (1998) has showedhow trends in organizational develop-ment have been slightly changed whenadopted in an other part of the world.This has f ex been the case with institu-tional standards like Management ByObjectives (MBO) and Total Qualitymanagement (TQM). The same seemsto be the case with telework. Thisshould not be taken as a critique of thescientific community, but it shows howtelework is an elastic concept, whichcan be introduced for several reasonsor needs.

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

"Telecommute"

"Home-office"

"Telework"

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Figure 1 Total number of newspaper articles on telework (“fjernarbeid”), home-office(“hjemmekontor”) and telecommuting (“telependling”), 1990 – 1998 in three

Norwegian newspapers (Aftenposten, Dagens Næringsliv and Bergens Tidende)

12 Telektronikk 4.1999

tions, telework became a favorite topic inthe computer magazines. But also in theordinary newspapers, the words telework(“fjernarbeid”), home office (“hjemme-kontor”) and telecommute (“telepend-ling”) gradually became a commonoccurrence. In 1998 more than 30 articleswere published on the theme of telework,telecommute, or home-office in threelarger newspapers.5) In contrast, onlyfive articles were published four yearsearlier (see Figure 1).

2.2 The need for knowledge

The renewed interest for telework bythe public press fell into line with certainstructural changes in the Norwegian labormarket. During the early 1990s the labormarket suffered from a lack of skilledworkers in several areas. The situation ofa mismatch between supply and demandof capacity of work had changed into asituation where there was a general lackof skilled workers particularly in the pro-fessions concerned with IT and engineer-ing. In this context, telework was increas-ingly used by the enterprises as a way toattract new groups of skilled workers. Insome cases the teleworking option evenoccurred in job advertisements for pro-gressive private companies.

In most cases telework in the early 1990srepresented an opportunity for ordinaryemployed workers. Yet, in some casestelework was discussed in relation to theuse of self-employed as a way of achiev-ing a more “flexible organisation” (Lie,1994). The group of self-employed work-ing from home has always been a signifi-cant part of the homebased teleworkers,reaching almost 50 % in some ratings,but no growth in the number of self-em-ployed due to teleworking has been re-ported (cf. Julsrud, 1998). The discus-sions on a more flexible labor marketbased on looser relations between com-pany and employed, did however clearlypropel much of the debate on teleworking.

An alternative solution to the lack ofskilled workers is of course to strengthenthe knowledge and competence in the

existing workforce. One major effort inthis area was made by the Norwegian oilcompany Statoil, when they in 1993offered a free PC with ISDN connectionand Internet to all their employees. Theidea was that if the staff could do more oftheir training at home, this would benefitboth the individual and the enterprise.The terms of the recipients were only tosubmit some general PC training duringthe next years. Several other companiesfollowed up the idea of home-PC for theemployers during the next years andtoday 10 – 15 companies offer sucharrangements (Folkedal et al., 1997).6)

The home PCs in Statoil and other com-panies did not comprise the opportunityof working at home during regular work-ing hours, so it should not be regarded asteleworking. There is, however, reasonsto believe that the introduction PCs in thehomes brought more realism into the dis-cussions of more regular teleworking inthe future.

In parallel with the home-PC trend, manylarge enterprises have recently becomeinterested in using telework as a part oflarger reorganizations of the office space.Together with a general interest foroffice sharing systems, such as hot-desk-ing and flexible offices, the focus onnomadic work has been much strongerthe last years (Julsrud, 1998). The inter-est here is not on the supplementaryhome-office, but rather on more compre-hensive changes in the total office space.Several Norwegian enterprises are cur-rently running pilot studies with officesharing among groups of their staff. Theobjective here is of course to save costson office space and real estate, but insome cases also to develop new commu-nication environments among theemployees. In other cases the objective issimply to stimulate the staff to work incloser contact with customers and clients.

2.3 Research initiatives

The first real Norwegian studies on tele-work followed much the same lines asthe early California studies, trying tomeasure the impact of telecommunica-tions on the use of the private car. In thelate 1970s a theoretical model was devel-oped by a group of social scientific re-searchers, estimating that telework to-

gether with other telecommunication-based applications, could generate 20 %more traffic, but also substitute 16 of thetravels made by private car (Gulbrandsenet al., 1978). In the late 1980s more prac-tical trials were launched, focussing onthe use of telework to stimulate the locallabor markets in rural parts of the coun-try. The largest field trial included thelaunching of neighborhood offices ineight local municipalities and lasted forseveral years (Hetland et al., 1989).Thus, the shift of focus of this researchwas much in accordance with the politi-cal attitude signalled in official docu-ments. Despite comprehensive effortsfrom local governments the centers weregradually closed during the early 1990s.

In 1994 the Norwegian Research Councillaunched another large research projecton telework/telecommuting. The projectgroup included researchers from Telenorand Avenir, and the project comprisedworking groups to examine critical issueson teleworking, as well as field trialswith homework in 13 enterprises. Someof the immediate results have been pre-sented in a Norwegian handbook for tele-workers (Bakke et al., 1998). There arestill activities going on in the project.7)

In addition minor reports have been writ-ten on the penetration of telework, quali-tative analysis of teleworkers and theo-retical contributions by Telenor R&D aswell as other research institutions. Thegeneral pattern seems to be that the stud-ies in the field have moved from lookinginto telework centers to examining home-based telework much like the interest inthe official documents and reports. Itseems that the discussion of teleworkamong the researchers is closely con-nected to the understanding reflected inofficial documents and among the public.However, there have been some recentinitiatives to establish local telework cen-ters in Oslo and other urban areas. Someexperiences have been discussed in arecent report (Bjørnholt, 1998), but it isstill too early to decide whether thesenew neighborhood offices will succeedin the long run.

2.4 Summing up

The discussion so far has showed howtelework gradually has been introduced

4) During the period 1986 to 1995 theincome after taxes has increased with7 percent for the average Norwegianhousehold unit (SSB, 1997).

5) The terms telework, telecommute andhome-office more or less cover theNorwegian terms; “fjernarbeid”,“telependling” and “hjemmekontor” .

6) However, not every company has beenas generous as Statoil; most of thehome-PC arrangements include partfinancing by the individual.

7) This project is described in detail inthe article “Developing telework regu-lations” by J.W. Bakke published inthis volume.

13Telektronikk 4.1999

into the Norwegian public debate, andadopted in accordance with certain politi-cal goals and later, certain needs in busi-ness enterprises. I have focused on thepresentation of telework in official docu-ments and highlighted some major linesin the public discussion of telework dur-ing the 1990s. The interest has shiftedsomewhat in the direction of telework asa means for enterprises to hold on toskilled workers, and also to get into con-tact with new ones located outside thelocal area. The initial discussion of tele-work, characterized by a motivation tomaintain employment in rural areas,seems to have faded somewhat.

It seems clear that the general interest forthe topic has been increasing, at leastmeasured by numbers of articles andnumbers of initiatives in enterprises andamong local groups. But there also seemsto be a growing number of workingmethods included under the broad head-ing of telework. New concepts of “homePCs”, “mobile work” and “flexible officespaces” have been introduced in the dis-cussion during the last years, challengingthe two traditional types of telework(homework and telework centers).

The presentation given in this chapter is,as I mentioned in the introduction, col-ored by my personal perception of thedevelopment within a field in which Ialso have been engaged, and also con-tributed to, myself. I believe, however,that the presentation provides a generalframework for the statistical survey pre-sented in the next chapter. In the finalchapter, I will return to the themes out-lined here, when I discuss the develop-ment of telework as a social innovationin the last chapter.

3 The distribution ofteleworkers

3.1 Definitions of telework

As often remarked, no single definitionson “telework” are available. This causesproblems, for obvious reasons, when onewants to measure and compare the diffu-sion of telework in different countries orregions. Lars Qvortrup has recentlyshowed how measures of teleworkers inthe UK have varied between 100,000 andover 1 billion 8) (Qvortrup, 1998). Buteven if there is no single definition avail-able, there is on a more general level acommon understanding of the “basiccharacteristics” of telework9) (cf. Huws,

1988; Huws et al., 1990; Korte et al.,1996; Olson, 1987). Three main charac-teristics are often used to frame the fieldof teleworking:

• It is first of all work regulated by somesort of agreement;

• It is work that is done at a certain dis-tance to the main office, employee orcontractor;

• It makes use of information and com-munication technology (ICT) to assistthe work that is conducted at a dis-tance.

With reference to this framework, somemajor types of telework have beenpointed out as most prominent, including“homework”, “mobile work”, and “tele-work centers”, see Figure 2. In addition,it is possible to point at a type of tele-work that consists of a mix of homeworkand ordinary office work, called “alternat-ing telework”. Although it is possible toidentify several subgroups, this seems tobe the three major types of telework, sup-plemented by a variety of new types ofoffice environments – “flexible offices”.

The focus for this article is on the home-based teleworker because this is expectedto be the most common, and it is the easi-est to find empirical data. I will, how-ever, also pay some attention to the dis-tribution of mobile workers, becausethere is evidence that there are importantconnections between these major “modes”of teleworking, and that this type couldbe more important in the future (Julsrud,1998).

While pointing at the general characteris-tics of telework describing the phenom-ena, it does not solve the problem of aconcise definition of the different typesof telework. Critical questions like; “howmuch must one work at home before it isseen as telework?” or “how much ICT is

needed to call it telework?” are difficultto answer. Yet, for statistical means it isnecessary to find a pragmatic and practi-cal solution to these questions. I will hereuse an operational definition that stressesthe first two points – that telework is paidwork, and that it is conducted at a dis-tance to the employer or contractor,slightly more than it is based on the useof ICT. More precisely, I will use the lastpoint as a second order criterion to distin-guish the ICT-oriented teleworkers fromgeneral homework, see Table 1.

Thus, I will first of all analyze the distri-bution of homework, full time, part timeand mobile work. As a subgroup of thepart time homework, I will apply theterm ICT-based homework, to distin-guish the PC users from the rest. It isimportant to notice that these categoriesare not fully exclusive: The IB home-work is, in essence, a subgroup of parttime homework. The homeworkers arealso often represented in the group ofmobile workers and vice versa. Thismakes the categories more like Chineseboxes than separate categories. Obvi-ously, this puts some important restric-tions on how to use the data.

3.2 Leading hypothesis

The discussion so far has brought to thesurface some general expectations, orhypothesis, on the distribution and themotives of the Norwegian teleworkers(chapter 2). These expectations can eas-ily be expressed in the form of four guid-ing hypothesis:

1)“The number of teleworkers is increas-ing among Norwegian employees.”This should be a logical consequenceof the more sound interest among theindividuals and the organizations. Thenew emphasis on home PC arrange-ments points in the same direction.

2)“The teleworking practice is domi-nated by professionals who possessskills that are attractive in the labormarket.” Few indicators suggest thatemployees are forced to work at home

8) Robert Kraut (1989) has in a similarway pointed to the unfortunate factthat US measures of teleworkers dur-ing the eighties switched between 0and 20 percent of the workforce.

9) Beer & Blanc have surveyed over 50different definitions of telework andthey report that there seems to be acommon characteristic that they allfocus on three dimensions: organiza-tion of the work, distance between theemployer and the employee, and theuse of information technology (afterDiMartino & Wirth, 1990).

Home-work

Mobilework

Teleworkcenter

Telework

Figure 2 Major types of telework

14 Telektronikk 4.1999

or elsewhere. Rather, telework hasbeen a fringe benefit by the enterprisesto attract educated workers.

3)“The teleworkers are using more andmore information and communicationtechnologies (ICT).” This appears as anatural consequence of the penetrationof communication equipment like PCs,Internet, ISDN, cellular telephones,pagers, etc.

4)“The teleworkers are mainly motivatedby individual needs.” This followsfrom the arguments presented above.The general trend seems to be that tele-work is more and more motivated byindividual, more than societal needs.

I will use these hypotheses as guidelinesfor the analysis in the rest of this chapter.

3.3 The data

The data in this analysis is based ona household survey repeated three times;in 1995, 1997 and 1998. In each instancea battery of core question has beenrepeated, although some questions havebeen added in subsequent surveys. Theinformants are a representative sample ofNorwegian households, including bothwage earners and others between 17 and79 years of age. The total survey hasincluded about 2000 households eachyear, of which approximately 40 % havebeen considered wage earners.10) Thecumulated number of teleworkers (1995

– 1997) includes 29 full time homework-ers, 180 part time homeworkers and 443mobile workers.

3.4 Number of teleworkers

As in most other European countries,there are fewer full time homeworkersin Norway (cf. Korte et al., 1996). Thenumbers have fluctuated somewhat dur-ing the period, but this group representsapproximately 1 percent of the work-force, see Figure 3. In total, this meansthat about 23,000 persons use the homeas their ordinary office. Turning to thepart time homeworkers, that is wageearners who work more than 5 hours perweek in their own homes, the number is

more substantial. The general penetrationof this group is approximately 7 % of theworkforce, if we use the average numberof the three surveys. Surprisingly, how-ever, the numbers in this category havedecreased significantly during the period,from over 8 % to 5.2 % in 1998.11) Thisindicates that the number of people doingwork tasks in their homes is not growing,as hypothesized. A closer look at thegroup of PT homeworkers reveals thatapproximately every third had spent oneor more full days in their homes duringthe previous week, which representsabout 1.8 % of the total workforce.12)

The ICT-based homework, which con-sists of wage earners that conduct workin their own home more than five hoursper week, and use ICT equipment, is ofcourse a smaller group. As mentionedearlier, the only technology consideredhere is the use of PC in the daily workoperations. Treated as a separate cate-gory, the ICT-based homeworkers repre-

Homework Full time (FT homework) Full time paid work conducted in thehome 5 days a week

Part time (PT homework) Paid work conducted in the homemore than 5 hours per week

ICT-based (IB homework) Paid work conducted in the homemore than 5 hours per week with theuse of PC (and possibly other ICTequipment)

Mobile work Part time Paid work that is conducted outsidethe office and the home more than 5hours a week

11)Pearsons R = .006 (Value = -0.54 /St.Error = .019 / Tb = -2,743).

12)This is what we could label the groupof telecommuters, because their tele-work arrangements replace one ormore work-travels. Replacing worktravels with working at home or in alocal tele-center is at the heart of thisconcept (cf. Nilles et al., 1976).

Table 1 Categories of teleworkers, applied in the analysis

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1995 1997 1998

FT homework

PT homework

IB homework

Mobile work

Figure 3 Penetration of different types of teleworkers in Norway 1995 – 1998

10)It should be noted that the wage earn-ers do not include those employed inthe agriculture, fishing and forestrysectors. The reason for this is simplythat in these sectors, homework hasbeen a common practice for ages, sothey should be kept apart from a possi-ble new wave of teleworkers.

15Telektronikk 4.1999

sent 4.5 % of the workforce, that is app-roximately 100,000 persons in Norway.In contrast to PT homeworkers, the num-ber of ICT-based homeworkers has beenconstant at least for the last two years(from 1997 to 1998).

The group of mobile workers, as definedabove, is the largest category. The per-cent of the workforce who conduct morethan five hours of paid work outside theoffice and the home is between 16 and17, and there are only minor changesover the period. It is however importantto stress that this category includes morethan the white-collar worker “on the run”with a lap-top under his arm and a cellu-lar in his pocket. Mobile work, as it isdefined here, also covers taxi drivers,truck drivers, sales people, constructionworkers and several other vocations.

3.5 The typical teleworker

Hypothesis two, presented above, statedthat the teleworkers would have a rela-tively privileged status in the labor mar-ket. I will here look closer at the tele-workers’ professions, status at work,income, gender and their family pattern.

Looking first at the type of business inwhich the teleworkers typically work,one finds that the different telework-types appear to be scattered over a sur-prisingly broad area, see Figure 4. Themost salient attribute seems to be thatthere is far more homework in the cate-gory “education and research”, than inany other. This is in particular the casefor PT homework, where approximately17 % of the employed work at homemore than five hours a week. There isalso a lot of PT homework in “privateservices”. These two groups also deploymost of the ICT-based working fromhome. Mobile work is most commonin the “transportation businesses” and“manufacturing industry”.

Looking at the professions, there is alsoan impressive range represented amongthe teleworkers. The PT homeworkersinclude such different occupations asarchitects, data consultants, union work-ers and one freelance singer(!). The PThomework is most common among self-employed and white collar workers. Asmany as 29 % of the self-employedworked as part time homeworkers as didalmost 10 % of the higher level clerks,and about 7 % of the middle level clerks.In contrast, only 0.9 % of the unskilledworkers where PT homeworkers

Looking at the variable status at work itseems that telework is a habit among thehigher level employees and the self-employed, more than among the skilledand unskilled workers and the lowerlevel employees (see Figure 5). In partic-ular ICT-based homework is more fre-quent among the higher level employees,and the full time homeworkers are mostprominent among the self-employed. Wealso asked the respondents if they had aprofession where they figured as leaders.Almost one third of the wage earners

answered affirmative to this question.However, over 50 % of the FT home-workers and the PT homeworkers indi-cated they had this kind of work. For themobile group, the numbers were some-what lower. Thus, the teleworkers wereactually more often engaged in manage-ment work. On the other hand, it waseven more compelling to see that amongthe managers there were twice as manyPT homeworkers, IB homeworkers andmobile workers as among the others.This suggests that homework and mobile

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Tran

spor

t (air

, sea

, land

)

Trad

e, in

dustr

i, buil

ding

Com

mer

ce, b

ankin

g,

Priva

e se

rvice

s

Publ

ich a

dmin

istra

tion

Educ

ation

and r

esea

rch

Publ

ic se

rvice

s

FT homework

PT homework

IB homework

Mobile work

and

cons

truct

ion

insu

ranc

e

0

10

20

30

40

50

Unsk

illed

work

er

Skille

d wo

rker

Empl

oyee

, low

er

Emplo

yee,

med

ium

Emplo

yee,

high

er

Self e

mplo

yed

FT homework(N=29)

PT homework(N=180)

IB homework(N=79)

Mobile work(N=443)

All wage earners(N=2573)

Figure 4 FT homework, PT homework, IB homework andmobile workers within different categories of work

(1995 – 1998), in percent

Figure 5 Teleworkers’ social status (1995 – 1998). Percent of teleworkers in each category

14)The options were: 1) I need to makeplans and prepare for the next work-day 2) I need to do work that I did notmanage to finish during regular work-ing hours, 3) I want to spend moretime with the family, 4) I want toavoid disturbances when working, 5)I want to spend less time on commut-ing, 6) It is decided by my employer,7) I am a self employed, with no otherworkplace, 8) Other reasons.

16 Telektronikk 4.1999

work are closely connected to the work-ing situations of the managers

The impression of telework as a habitof the management is reinforced whenlooking at the gross income of the tele-workers in comparison to the total num-ber of wage earners in the sample (seeFigure 7). The PT homeworkers, and inparticular the mobile workers, were morecommon among the respondents withgross incomes of over NOK 300,000.13)

Bearing this difference in mind, it is not

surprising that there are slightly moremen in the categories of PT and IBhomework and mobile work, than theaverage wage earners. The FT home-workers, on the other hand, is the onlytype of telework with a preponderanceof women (see Figure 6).

3.6 Use of ICT amongteleworkers

Are the teleworkers using more and moreICT, as stated in our third hypothesis? Inour survey we asked if the teleworkersused communication media to keep incontact with the employees or the con-

tractor. The results firstly indicate thatthere is a broad range of media in use bythe teleworkers, and the most eager usersseem to be the mobile workers and theICT-based homeworkers, see Figure 8.Ordinary telephone and cellular are notsurprisingly the most important medium,but e-mail has become as common astelefax and ordinary mail. E-mail is usedby approximately every third PT home-worker and almost every second ICT-based homeworker and mobile worker.

It is here interesting to note that e-maildoes not seem to replace the telefax, butit looks like these two technologies to-gether with ordinary post is stimulatingeach other respectively. Considering thatthe ICT-based homework consists of thepart time homeworkers who also use PCsin their work, it is a bit strange that theuse of e-mail is not higher than 50 %. Itshould also be noted that the group whospend most of the time away from work,are the ones who use the least technolo-gies. Probably this is explained by thefact that there is a large number of self-employed in this group, with no stableconnection to a workplace outside thehome.

Looking at the use of media technologiesover time, it is clear that there has beena significant increase in the use of e-mailamong the teleworkers. Figure 9 showshow this technology has developedrapidly within the categories of mobilework, part time work and ICT-basedhomework. For example, the part-timehomeworkers have increased their e-mailuse from 12 to 44 percent.

3.7 Teleworkers’ motives

In the final hypothesis, it was stated thatteleworkers would be mostly driven byindividual needs. In the survey we askedthe respondents to indicate their motivesby choosing between seven options.14)

For each option it was possible to signaleither “very important”, “some impor-tance” or “no importance”. The question

13)Corresponding to approx.USD 37,000.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

All wage earners

Women

Men

FThomework

PThomework

IBhomework

Mobilework

All wageearners

Figure 6 Percentage of men and women within differenttypes of telework, and all wage earners in the sample

(1995 – 1997)

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 - 9

9

100

- 149

150

- 199

200

- 249

250

- 299

300

- 399

400

- 499

500<

PT homework

Mobile work

All wage earners

0

5

10

15

20

25

Figure 7 Gross income of PT homeworkers, mobileworkers and all the wage earners in the sample,

in percent

17Telektronikk 4.1999

was only asked to the homeworkers, anddue to the limited number of answers itis not possible to analyze variations be-tween telework types. Figure 10 showsthat among the self-employed workers,lack of other office space turned out to bethe most important motivation selectedby almost every fourth teleworker. Over36 % indicated that this was of majorimportance.

The employed homeworkers seemed tobe attracted by the opportunity to avoiddisturbances (27.3 %) and to reduce theircommuting time (22.3 %). About 8 %also indicated that the major reason forhomeworking was to get ahead with theirwork tasks and to prepare for the nextworkday. The need to keep more in con-tact with the family appeared as a typicalsecond-order motive. This was also thecase for the female part of the teleworkers.

3.8 Summing up

The results presented in this chapter haveshed some light upon our guiding hypo-theses:

• The first hypothesis which stated that“the number of teleworkers is increas-ing among Norwegian employees”must be rejected. The number of parttime homeworkers has actually beendecreasing somewhat during the lastthree years, while ICT-based home-work and mobile work have beenstable during the 1995 to 1997 period.

• The second hypothesis, that “the tele-working practice is dominated by pro-fessionals who have skills that areattractive in the labor market” hasbeen supported in this analysis. Thereis evidence showing that most of theteleworkers are in leading positionsand earn more than the average em-ployee. Among the managers, therewere twice as many part time home-workers, ICT-based homeworkers andmobile workers as the average.

• The third hypothesis, stating that “theteleworkers are using more and moreinformation and communication tech-nologies (ICT)” was supported. Focus-ing on the use of e-mail, both the part-time homeworkers, the ICT-basedhomeworkers and the mobile workershad more than doubled their use of thistechnology. The part time homework-ers had increased their e-mail use from12 to 44 percent from 1995 to 1998.

• The last hypothesis, that “the telework-ers are mainly motivated by individual

needs” was at least partly supported.The most important need expressed bythe employed teleworkers was to workmore undisturbed, while the need tolook after the family was secondary.However, it also appeared that a lotof the homeworkers simply used thehome as an office because they did nothave access to other work spaces asself-employed.

4 Refocusing the picture

“In the future we will be able to workwherever we want to, whenever we

want.” This is the story of the futurelabor market, as futurists and the socialresearchers often tell it. However, theempirical evidence presented in thisarticle leaves us with a sobering, butslightly disturbing picture of the situa-tion. Telework seems to be developingon a relatively