What Drives Telecommuting?

Abstract

A 2002 survey of Southern California residents was analyzed to evaluate the relative importance of factors that determined a worker's propensity to telecommute and telecommuting frequency. The survey collected a wealth of individual demographic information as well as job type, industry, and employer characteristics from about 5,000 residents. In agreement with previous studies, the propensity to telecommute was found to increase with worker age and educational attainment. At the same time, it was concluded that the propensity to telecommute depended to a large extent on a worker's job characteristics and that the quantitative effects of job characteristics were at least as important as demographic factors. The factors that affected telecommuting frequency were also studied based on a 1-week commuting diary of the telecommuters in the survey. The industry and occupation categories that played a significant role in affecting the propensity to telecommute did not have similar effects on telecommuting frequency. On the contrary, some other job-related factors showed substantial influences.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Handy

S. L.

and Mokhtarian

P. L.

. Planning for Telecommuting: Planning and Policy Issues. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 1 1995, pp. 99–111.

Walls

M. A.

and Safirova

E. A.

. A Review of the Literature on Telecommuting and Its Implications for Vehicle Travel and Emissions. RFF Discussion Paper 04–43. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 2004.

Pratt

J. H.

Asking the Right Questions About Telecommuting: Avoiding Pitfalls in Surveying Home-Based Work. Transportation, Vol. 27, 2000, pp. 99–116.

Shafizadeh

K. R.

Nemeier

D. A.

Mokhtarian

P. L.

and Salomon

. The Costs and Benefits of Telecommuting: An Evaluation of Macro-Scale Literature. California PATH Working Paper UCB-ITS-PWP-98-5. University of California, Davis, 1998.

Bailey

D. E.

and Kurland

N. B.

. A Review of Telework Research: Findings, New Directions, and Lessons for the Study of Modern Work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, 2002, pp. 383–400.

Shin

Sheng

O. R. L.

and Higa

. Telework: Existing Research and Future Directions. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, Vol. 10, No. 2 2000, pp. 85–101.

Nilles

Carlson

Grey

and Hanneman

. The Telecommunications-Transportation Tradeoff. Wiley, New York, 1976.

Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary. Transportation Implications of Telecommuting. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1993.

Department of Energy, Office of the Secretary. Energy, Emissions, and Social Consequences of Telecommuting. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1994.

10.

Christensen

(ed). The New Era of Home-Based Work. Westview, Boulder, Colo., 1988.

11.

Olson

M. H.

Remote Office Work: Changing Work Patterns in Space and Time. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 26, 1983, pp. 182–187.

12.

Baruch

and Nicholson

. Home Sweet Work: Requirements for Effective Home Working. Journal of General Management, Vol. 23, 1997, pp. 15–30.

13.

Bernardino

and Ben-Akiva

. Modeling the Process of Adoption of Telecommuting: Comprehensive Framework. In Transportation Research Record 1552, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 161–170.

14.

Huws

Korte

W. B.

and Robinson

. Telework: Towards the Elusive Office. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom, 1990.

15.

Yen

J.-R.

and Mahmassani

H. S.

. Telecommuting Adoption: Conceptual Framework and Model Estimation. In Transportation Research Record 1606, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 95–102.

16.

Olszewski

and Mokhtarian

P. L.

. Telecommuting Frequency and Impacts for State of California Employees. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 45, 1994, pp. 275–286.

17.

Mannering

J. S.

and Mokhtarian

P. L.

. Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting Frequency in California: An Exploratory Analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 49, 1995, pp. 49–73.

18.

Mokhtarian

P. L.

and Salomon

. Modeling the Desire to Telecommute: The Importance of Attitudinal Factors in Behavioral Models. Transportation Research A, Vol. 31, No. 1 1997, pp. 35–50.

19.

Varma

C.-I.

Stanek

and Mokhtarian

. Duration and Frequency of Telecenter Use: Once a Telecommuter, Always a Telecommuter? Transportation Research C, Vol. 6, 1998, pp. 47–68.

20.

Wells

Douma

Loimer

Olson

and Pansing

. Telecommuting Implications for Travel Behavior: Case Studies from Minnesota. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1752, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 148–156.

21.

Drucker

and Khattak

A. J.

. Propensity to Work from Home: Modeling Results from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 108–117.

22.

Popuri

Y. D.

and Bhat

C. R.

. On Modeling Choice and Frequency of Home-Based Telecommuting. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1858, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 55–60.

23.

Thériault

Villeneuve

Vandersmissen

M.-H.

and Des Rosiers

. Homeworking, Telecommuting and Journey to Workplaces: Are Differences Among Genders and Professions Varying over Space? Presented at 45th Congress of the European Regional Science Association, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2005.

24.

Greene

W. H.

Econometric Analysis, 5th ed. University Prentice Hall, New York, 2003.

25.

Heckman

J. J.

Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error. Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 1 1979, pp. 153–162.