There it is, on the front page of today’s Financial Times, in a list of energy saving recommendations issued in a proposal by the IEA (International Energy Association). Point #5 is the simple statement: “Telecommuting: Inform public of benefits of working from home”.
The article, and it’s prominence on page 1 is prompted by the rocketing price of oil – and heightened anxiety caused by the Goldman Sachs report of prices as high as $105/barrel.
Reducing long commute distances IS a significant part of the answer. The problem though is that, as we know from the past two decades in which telecommuting programs have been tried in various forms, more, much more, is going to be needed than simply “informing the public” of its virtues. Proponents have for too long oversimplified what it’s going to take to shift the modern post-industrial workforce to accept telecommuting as their norm. Telecommuting isn’t just another commuting option – like choosing to pick up passengers that allow driving in the commute lane. It is/will come about as part of a major shift in organization design, work patterns, urban patterns and culture and will be enabled by a myriad of new technologies (already here) and more importantly, social institutions and service industries.
Of course, what I’m getting at here is the WorkClub – or to use the definition I’ve been using lately – networks of ubiquitous, shared (aggregated) work spaces that provide access to work support services and technologies, social networking and learning opportunities. And the key characteristic of the WorkClub is that it should be really close (say 5 – 10 minutes commute) to where someone LIVES (which is why they need to be ubiquitous, and provide common work systems when they are away from home (which is why they need to be a network).
So, why is telecommuting as it is mostly promoted not so simple – and therefore not succeeding to the degree that it is going to make a big enough impact on oil use. Like anything complex, the reasons are many and interrelated. Here are a few (discussed at greater length below);
1. WORKING AT HOME IS NOT THE (WHOLE) ANSWER.
2. SHIFTING THE COSTS INFRASTRUCTURAL SUPPORT FROM CORPORATIONS TO WORKERS.
3. JUSTIFYING THE SHIFT OF INFRASTRUCTURAL SUPPORT BACK TO THE CORPORATION
4. CHANGING CORPORATE STRUCTURES TO REALIZE THE FULL BENEFIT OF DISTRIBUTED WORK
5. CHANGING URBAN STRUCTURES TO FULLY ENABLE DISTRIBUTED WORK
1. WORKING AT HOME IS NOT THE (WHOLE) ANSWER.
At least not for the majority of people who, as it turns out, really NEED to be around other people to stay focused, stay awake and stay inspired. And it turns out that those other people don’t need to be their boss, or even co-workers; just other people who are equally intent as they are in getting a good days work done.
2. SHIFTING THE COSTS INFRASTRUCTURAL SUPPORT FROM CORPORATIONS TO WORKERS.
One of the unspoken realities of past working from home arrangements is that it has been a massive shift of infrastructural costs from employer to employee. Few corporations, till now, have had very generous programs for covering the myriad costs of keeping an office functional. This will have to change if employees are going to be willing, in large numbers, to give up corporate privileges if there is also a corresponding cost they will have to bear.
3. JUSTIFYING THE SHIFT OF INFRASTRUCTURAL SUPPORT BACK TO THE CORPORATION
At the same time, few corporations will be willing to pay incremental costs of telework arrangements if there are not concomitant savings and productivity benefits. To gain the former, this means they’re going to have to shut down significant amounts of corporate real estate and services. To gain the latter, they’re going to have to provide employees with more than just a DSL line at home. They’re going to have to create, or subscribe to programs, systems and services that give their employees the best resources, training and technology – some of which simply won’t be feasible if they are chained to their home office any more than if they are chained to a cubicle.
4. CHANGING CORPORATE STRUCTURES TO REALIZE THE FULL BENEFIT OF DISTRIBUTED WORK
Well, I didn’t say it was going to be easy or painless – if people are going to work in a fundamentally different way, organizations are going to have to have a fundamentally different relationship with their employees. We are already seeing this in the move to free agency. But that is just the beginning – and it is a challenge that is fraught will all the complexity of evolving labor relations.
5. CHANGING URBAN STRUCTURES TO FULLY ENABLE DISTRIBUTED WORK
Now that we have overhauled work, the corporation and work support institutions, if we’re really going to reduce profligate consumption of energy (even if it is renewable) and trade out insane commutes for something more humane, the very urban fabric is going to have to change. Putting it simplistically, people will work, as in pre industrial revolution cities, where they live. And that will mean fewer industrial parks, smaller corporate campuses, mixed use "CBD"s and residential areas as dotted with work support facilities (I’ll continue to call them WorkClubs) as they are now with churches, restaurants and coffee shops (which may well play a significant roll in this evolving urban design – but more of that later).
When you look at it this way, “telecommuting” is simply too small of an idea to capture the richness of the opportunity and the complexity of the challenge we have, as a society, ahead of us to move away from our addiction to oil. If “informing the public about the benefits of working from home” starts us out on that path, I’m all for it.
I’m on flight 2609 bound for John Wayne airport headed to a meeting to discuss a possible future of workclubs. The captain has just made the announcement that we will be landing shortly – at GATE 3! What am I to make of this? A pure coincidence with the name I gave to my vision of the future of work? Or a portentious sign that this saga is indeed not yet done.
As I sit here, pondering the demise of Gate 3 WorkClub while sitting on a jet heading for gate 3, the role of serendipity presents me with some hard questions – how much credence to give to these unexpected events and unsought opportunities, and how much to rely purely on rational decision making; the business plan and careful analysis of the possible.
From the beginning, this adventure has been fraught with happenstance and coincidence that I have consciously decided to yield to.
The entire evolution of Gate 3 was the result of a series of cascading serendipitous events – or so it seems in retrospect. Incidental discussion produced ideas that were unexpected; people volunteered to help at critical times; publicity and partners showed up when least expected and most appreciated. What started as a short term expedience grew in scale and vista to become a prototype for a brave new world of work. A beautiful edifice arose and received acclaim and fame.
But a time came when the reverse seemed true – nothing seemed to go right and nothing lined up the way it was expected to. Things fell apart when they were least “supposed” to and eventually, all the signs pointed to what now, in retrospect, seems inevitable. Gate 3 WorkClub had to be shut down.
People keep telling me this is not the end. The question is, what “signs” are there that would point the way to the next incarnation? What is it that this is not the end of? Is my arrival at gate 3 of John Wayne airport a sign?
As a wise person recently said to me; come see me in 20 years time and I’ll let you know.
For now I’ll offer a few guidelines for following signs that appear portentous:
1. Don’t take a coincidence at face value.
2. Inquire into the meaning and insights offered by a serendipitous event (a corrolary to 1).
3. Look for patterns, not single events.
4. Allow chance; contain risk.
5. Keep your ego out of it. Coincidence is not a compliment or overt affirmation of you or your ideas.
6. Things that don’t happen on cue are just as significant as the unexpected.
7. Stay tuned to everything.
While this may be the first blogsite solely dedicated to discussing the emergence of this new work institution, it is by no means a totally new or unique idea.
The first posting in the category of convergent thinking is a site I just ran across it here. It describes “The Connectivity Club, how do you work and how do you study?” as “…a place for people to meet and exhange information…It offers individual and shared instruments for work, training, information and entertainment activities both distant and in the area.”
It is one of a number of "Sustainable Everyday Scenarios of Urban Life" including "The Food Atelier", "Mobility Agency" and "Energy Workshop".
As best I can tell the site is the work of the Faculty of Design at Milan Polytechnic, and the work derives from design school students around the world.
I recently wrote to a correspondent that, though the club is closing down in Emeryville, I intend to do whatever I can to make sure that eventually “there are workclubs in every city in every corner of the world”.
Then I realized that I have never clearly articulated what a workclub is, if its not what we built in Emeryville. What have I learned about the essential elements of a workclub that I would like to see in every city? If the concept is to succeed, there are going to be a huge variety of forms and types that will be variations on a theme – but at their core they will need to reflect some common elements.
So here goes a first pass at a definition: a workclub is a congenial place, where people can find work community in a location that is easy and quick to get to and provides them the work amenties they need to do the portions of their work that are not best done at home or at a centralized corporate facility.
That’s quite a mouthful. And it involves a number of concepts that bear further definition.
PROXIMITY
Probably the most important attribute of a workclub is that it is close enough to where you live and convenient enough to get to that you don’t have to think twice about popping in for a few minutes, or, when you’re there, running home for lunch or to check on the kids.
One of the things we know about community, is that they tend to form best around where we live – around people we share more than just one dimension of our lives with; people who there’s a good chance of bumping into while shopping or out for a walk.
Of course its also important to have a ubiquitous network of clubs, so that when you’re NOT at home your “office” is where you are, as you expect from your computer or your phone network.
COMMUNITY: specifically “work” community
The last half century’s transition to a knowledge economy has been devastating to community. Robert Putnam’s book Bowling Alone nicely documents all the factors that have contributed to this. It is inevitable that, social animals that we are, people will seek alternate forms of work community – and workclubs will play a significant role in transforming people’s identification with work.
AMENITY: all the advanced work support services you need
One could argue that this should be the starting point for defining a workclub; if it does not embody whatever the latest amenities are – appropriate space configurations, the latest productivity and communication technologies and admin and tech support services that you can’t get at home, then why would anyone actually GO to the workclub in the first place. The key point is that the amenities will have to be “state of the art”. After all, how many people would go to a gym that only had jump ropes and punching balls – or a exersize bicyle a la 1970?
WORK COMMONS
This goes hand in hand with “amenity”, but bears some emphasis; without a “commons” an area (or multiple areas with diverse characters) where people can work around other people, or maybe just relax or recreate around other people IN THE WORK CONTEXT, then you lose the opportunities for serendipidous interaction. And the true value of the work community is precisely the opportunities it presents for serendipidous interactions that lead to creativity bursts that could never be planned or anticipated. And more, much more, about the importance of workclubs in promoting creativity. Most typically, commons comes in the form of food, what we’re most familiar with relaxing around and sharing with others. But it will also be other things – a spa, a gym, a games room, a learning center.
CONGENIALITY
It is a truism that any successful institution must be available in sufficient variety to allow diverse preferences and inclinations. Workclubs need to be as diverse as the cultures of the people who use them. What they will have to have in common is what all clubs have in common – they must display all the stylistic characteristics that allow their members to feel truly at ease, relaxed and appropriate. Just like successful hotel chains, this will be the characteristic that will set one ‘brand” of workclub apart from the others, no matter how similar they might be in service offering.
No doubt I will return to these definitions many time. I will also return to some of the other organizational elements that will be characteristic of the more successful workclubs. I welcome your thoughts – what do you think is absolutely essential from an institution that can support work into the next century?
Having been scooped on my own story by Heath Row at Fast Company (http://blog.fastcompany.com/archives/2005/01/27/work_space.html#comments) I bring bad news to those of you who were rooting for our little experiment in new work community in Emeryville, and good news for the other three of you who scoffed at the idea or the particular interpretation of it: I have decided to shut down the WorkClub in Emeryville. February will be our final month of operation.
The main reason for shutting down is lack of funds to do the serious kind of marketing that it is going to take to get subscriber traction – and the short runway I have left myself to generate this funding. The feedback I received in the early stages of development (and continue to get today) led me to believe that I would not need that runway – that fundraising was only needed for the next, expansion phase, which would be undertaken once the concept was proven in the single location. Hindsight proves me wrong.
Before admitting to too many mistakes (which are plentiful) I will first claim that much of the foresight that drove this project was largely correct. To summarize:
• There is a huge need for alternate, flexible work arrangements for people and companies who would like to base their operations, and that of their employees, out of their homes.
• People would really love to have a place to work in regularly that is very close to home.
• People prefer to work around other people they aren’t affiliated with than working alone.
• People are significantly more productive working around other people they aren’t formally affiliated with.
• People have intial resistance to not having a dedicated, lock up “office” to hang their shingle on, but get used to it, adapt to it and eventually come to prefer it once they realize that it actually fits the way they work.
• People really respond positively to well designed, light filled, comfortable spaces to work in – and are probably more productive working in them.
Ok, so I got a few things wrong too – or simply chose to ignore what I already knew well from having worked on dozens of innovations in consumer electronics and office systems over the years:
• Change happens slowly. Especially when it involves changing people’s behavior.
• Systemic change of any kind is the hardest to broach, and takes the longest time.
• Self employed people part with their money very reluctantly, even when it is for something they would really like to have.
• Corporations make decisions VERY slowly and embrace small changes with extreme resistance.
• Work and food are very closely associated for most people.
• Getting a work environment to function smoothly for 150 people, each with unique requirements, processes and preferences takes a lot of work, effort and diligence.
• People are way more attentive to things that don’t work smoothly than to things that do.
• The adage that “anything that can go wrong, will” is still pertinent, particularly with new, complex systems.
• “Build it and they will come” is a fantasy most suited to Hollywood movies.
I am by no means done with the WorkClub concept – as many have pointed out to me, it is inevitable that it will be done, somewhere, by someone. I have simply realized that in its full manifestation it is a vast enterprise – larger than any one individual or large corporation for that matter, can take on. So I will continue to write, evangelize and theorize about it . And look for people and organizations who are interested in collaborating in building one or the other piece of it. WorkClub isn’t any one place or concept. It is a complex social construct and business operation made up of networked physical spaces, technology and most importantly, people.
So going forward, this blog will become a forum for a discussion about WorkClub. I welcome you to collaborate – in this discussion or in the implementation of any pieces of it.