hbr.org Open in urlscan Pro
13.33.60.127  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

GET /search

<form action="/search" method="get">
  <div class="search-container opacity-0-medium-up">
    <input type="hidden" name="search_type" value="search-all">
    <input class="pts pbm search-box-desktop" autocomplete="off" name="term" data-type="search-input" placeholder="Search hbr.org">
    <input class="search-box-mobile" autocomplete="off" name="term" placeholder="Search hbr.org">
    <button>
      <svg aria-labelledby="title" viewBox="0 0 24 24">
        <title>Search</title>
        <g>
          <path d="M24.06,23.22l-6.38-6.38a10.11,10.11,0,1,0-.85.85l6.37,6.37ZM1.2,10.13A8.93,8.93,0,1,1,10.13,19,8.94,8.94,0,0,1,1.2,10.13Z"></path>
        </g>
      </svg>
    </button>
    <a href="#" class="clear-search-box do-not-show" js-target="clear-search-box">CLEAR</a>
  </div>
  <div class="backdrop-white width-100pct zindex-highest hide top-header--search-suggest" data-purpose="search-auto-suggest">
    <div class="font-gt-america">
      <ul class="no-bullet ptm mbs" data-container="results">
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray"></li>
        <li class="pbl pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray has-border-bottom"></li>
        <li class="ptl font-size-xsmall text-gray-light font-bold">SUGGESTED TOPICS</li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray no-bullet"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray no-bullet"></li>
        <li class="pbm pts line-height-normal font-size-15 darker-medium-gray no-bullet"></li>
      </ul>
    </div>
  </div>
</form>

Text Content

ADVERTISEMENT


Navigation Menu

Organizational culture   |   Is Remote Work Actually Better for the Environment?
Subscribe Sign In
Account Menu
Search Menu
Close menu
Search CLEAR
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * SUGGESTED TOPICS
 * 
 * 
 * 

Explore HBR
 * Diversity
 * Latest
 * The Magazine
 * Ascend
 * Most Popular
 * Podcasts
 * Video
 * Store
 * Webinars
 * Newsletters

Popular Topics
 * Managing Yourself
 * Leadership
 * Strategy
 * Managing Teams
 * Gender
 * Innovation
 * Work-life Balance
 * All Topics

For Subscribers
 * The Big Idea
 * Data & Visuals
 * Reading Lists
 * Case Selections
 * Subscribe

My Account
 * My Library
 * Topic Feeds
 * Orders
 * Account Settings
 * Email Preferences
 * Log Out
 * Sign In

 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

Subscribe Diversity Latest Podcasts Video The Magazine Ascend Store Webinars
Newsletters All Topics The Big Idea Data & Visuals Reading Lists Case Selections
My Library Account Settings Log Out Sign In


YOUR CART

Your Shopping Cart is empty.
Visit Our Store
Guest User
Subscriber
My Library Topic Feeds Orders Account Settings Email Preferences Log Out
Reading List
Reading Lists
Diversity Latest Magazine Ascend Topics Podcasts Video Store The Big Idea Data &
Visuals Case Selections
You have 1 free articles left this month.

You are reading your last free article for this month.

Subscribe for unlimited access.
Create an account to read 2 more.
Organizational culture


IS REMOTE WORK ACTUALLY BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT?

Commutes aren’t the only factor at play.
by
 * Ganga Shreedhar,
 * Kate Laffan,
   and
 * Laura M. Giurge

by
 * Ganga Shreedhar,
 * Kate Laffan,
   and
 * Laura M. Giurge

March 07, 2022
Martin Barraud/Getty Images
 * Tweet
 * Post
 * Share
 * Save
 * Get PDF
 * Buy Copies
 * Print

Summary.    Common sense says that without a commute, employees who can work
from home (WFH) have a lower environmental impact than their in-office peers,
but this isn’t necessarily the case. In fact, when multiple environmental net
impacts are taken into...more
Leer en español
Ler em português
 * Tweet
 * Post
 * Share
 * Save
 * Get PDF
 * Buy Copies
 * Print

The Covid-19 pandemic gave rise to the largest remote work “experiment” in
history, accelerating a long-term trend towards flexible, remote work, and
digitalization. The percentage of people working from home in the U.S. alone
rose from 5% to 37% during the height of the pandemic. Now, companies are
experimenting with different models of remote work as we come out of the crises.
Recent surveys show that 91% of remote employees would like to continue their
hybrid or remote working, and 76% say their employer will allow them to work
remotely going forward.

With the daily commute all but cancelled during successive Covid-19 lockdowns,
many have assumed that WFH will lead to environmental sustainability gains.
Indeed, such dramatic changes in mobility, production, and consumption patterns,
temporarily reduced global CO2 emissions by 17% in April 2020 compared to peak
2019 levels. But what seemed like a promising trend soon faded away: emissions
are now almost back at pre-pandemic levels, even as employees aren’t.

Indeed, our research also shows that WFH is not a clear win for the environment.
The net sustainability impact depends on several employee behaviors, from travel
to energy use, to digital device and waste management. It also depends on
several situational factors like home building and local infrastructure.

For companies racing to publish ESG indicators, like their carbon footprint, for
example, this shift to remote work presents new challenges. How should remote
work be accounted for against a company’s sustainability goals?


WHAT WFH EMPLOYEE BEHAVIORS SHOULD COMPANIES CONSIDER?

To understand the sustainability implications of WFH, companies need to consider
a range of environmentally relevant employee behaviors. We highlight four
behavioral domains that are particularly important: energy, travel, technology,
and waste. Behavioral change across these domains can have major environmental
impacts when aggregated across individuals, teams, companies, and industries.


ENERGY FOOTPRINT

The impact of WFH on energy use is mixed, with some studies finding a positive
effect, while others indicating a neutral or even a negative impact on energy
use. Ultimately, such impacts can vary substantially by employee’s individual
characteristics (e.g., awareness, attitudes, family size, wealth), home
infrastructure (e.g., building energy ratings, supplier), and even situational
factors (e.g., geographic location and season). When companies craft remote work
policies, for instance by subsidizing home energy bills, they also need to
account for sustainability impacts from residential energy emissions.


TRANSPORTATION FOOTPRINT

Reduced commuting when WFH will undoubtedly yield environmental benefits, but
there is emerging evidence of rebound effects, including increased non-work
travel and more short trips. For example, in a Californian sample of employees
who shifted to WFH during the Covid-19 pandemic, the decline in vehicle miles
travelled was accompanied by a 26% increase in the average number of trips
taken. Apart from changes to the work commute, potential changes in emissions
arising from business-related travel in hybrid settings (e.g., events and
conferences) will also matter.


TECHNOLOGY FOOTPRINT

From an individual footprint perspective, our digital behaviors add up. One
study suggests that a “typical business” user — albeit in the pre-Covid-19
period — creates 135kg (298lbs) CO2e (i.e., carbon dioxide equivalent) from
sending emails every year, which is the equivalent of driving 200 miles in a
family car, just under the distance from Brussels to London. But the typical
business person’s technology needs have now changed; fewer in-person office
interactions can mean more time spent communicating online. Equally problematic
is that the primary short-term WFH policy adopted by several companies has been
to provide employees with laptops, even at the risk of duplicating devices.


WASTE FOOTPRINT

In the UK, recycling increased during the first lockdown; this aligns with past
research showing that employees adopt more sustainable waste practices at home
than at the office. Thus, WFH may have a net positive environmental impact for
waste management behaviors, keeping in mind that local services like provision
of waste bins for sorting and recycling are important enabling factors. However,
there is also a risk of increased electronic and electrical waste (e-waste) — an
estimated 50 million tons a year globally, only 20% of which is formally
recycled.


HOW CAN COMPANIES MAKE WFH MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE?

Remote work presents fresh challenges for how best to observe and influence
behaviors that matter for sustainability. Employees’ homes represent their
private sphere and organizations need to tread carefully so as not to overreach.
At the same time, many employees will likely welcome a helping hand from their
employer to ensure that they their WFH set-up is both comfortable and
sustainable. Developing sustainability policies that yield co-benefits (e.g.,
environmental and financial benefits), ensures that organizations can
concurrently promote their employees’ well-being and work outcomes towards their
sustainability goals.

Organizational leaders who care about reducing their workforces’ environmental
impacts — and we think all leaders should — can start by designing WFH plans and
policies with the following three considerations in mind.


EMBED A SUSTAINABILITY CULTURE.

To create an environmentally sustainable and climate-friendly culture,
organizations need to make sure that sustainability considerations are routinely
embedded in every corporate decision across all departments — not just in CSR.
This means considering first what are the existing social norms and perceptions
for addressing remote (and in-house) employees’ travel, technology, waste, and
energy emissions, and then designing ways to decrease these emissions through
addressing how people interact with each of these practices.

For example: What initiatives, tools, and tips are already available that help
(or deter) employees’ green behavior at home? Is there a meeting policy that
promotes remote — rather than in-person — as the default? How are leaders and
managers addressing existing sustainability practices and commitments with their
teams, including their remote employees?

Leaders can further help shape a sustainability culture by adhering to existing
environmental policies themselves. Consider Ikea’s founder, Ingvar Kamprad, who
is often credited for bringing sustainability to the masses through business
practices that he adhered to as well, such as not flying business class. Just as
leaders need to walk the talk, they also need they also need to let employees
choose how they implement the policies offered. Doing so will allow employees to
feel supported rather than monitored, and boost rather than erode employees’
trust and goodwill.


PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE POLICIES.

Looking at existing policies is an important first step, but it is often not
enough. To embed an environmentally sustainable culture, organizational leaders
should provide remote employees with the right support in each of the outlined
domains. This could include additional policies like encouraging and supporting
employees to change to renewable sources of energy at home by providing access
to auto switching energy services. Employers could also provide incentives for
active travel for work meetings like bike schemes; they can further offer
recycling and safe disposal of duplicate or old electronic devices and e-waste
through in-house drop-off centers or partnerships with upcycling companies. This
is not an exhaustive list and employers should seek input from their employees
about additional desired policies and structures.


THINK GLOBAL, ACT LOCAL.

Some policies (e.g., automatically switching to the cheapest green energy
tariffs and tips for reducing emissions around the home) may be useful to all
employees. However, environmental footprints will vary substantially across
individuals, teams, companies, and industries. For example, one company’s
workforce might rely heavily on technology, so helping reduce emissions from
e-waste and energy is especially important. Another company’s workforce might
commute long distances or undertake frequent work travel; for this company the
priorities should be to lower travel emissions by reducing options like
non-essential trips, using low-carbon transport, flying economy for essential
trips, and carbon offsetting.

Depending on where your workforce is located, it may be more appropriate to
focus on emissions reduction from cooling versus heating, or both. The point
being that a one-size-fits-all approach won’t work. Instead, when designing and
promoting environmentally sustainable WFH policies, companies need to consider
the unique circumstances of their employees as well as the characteristics of
their business operations to identify the most relevant behaviors.

As remote work models become increasingly popular, fewer of employees’
sustainability impacts are likely to take place under employers’ physical roofs,
however, they will still occur on their watch. Alongside paying attention to the
specific circumstances and contexts of employees to better understand the
dimensions of environmental impacts, it is crucial to embed a culture of
sustainability through providing support, policies, and leadership for
employees. In doing so, organizations can ensure that WFH stacks up on a
comprehensive set of sustainability measures and that they achieve their
sustainability goals.

The authors thank James Elfer and Zoe Featherstone Smith at MoreThanNow for
starting and facilitating this conversation.

READERS ALSO VIEWED THESE ITEMS

 * HELPING PEOPLE CHANGE: COACHING WITH COMPASSION FOR LIFELONG LEARNING AND
   GROWTH
   
   Book
   Buy Now

 * COMPETING IN THE NEW WORLD OF WORK: HOW RADICAL ADAPTABILITY SEPARATES THE
   BEST FROM THE REST
   
   Book
   Buy Now

Read more on Organizational culture or related topics Work environments,
Corporate social responsibility and Sustainable business practices
 * GS
   Ganga Shreedharis an Assistant Professor in Behavioural Science at the London
   School of Economics and co-director of the MSc in Behavioural Science
   program. She is an Affiliate of the Department of Geography and Environment,
   an Associate at the Grantham Research Institute of Climate Change and the
   Environment and the Inclusion Initiative, and a Fellow of the Higher
   Education Academy.
 * KL
   Kate Laffan is an Assistant Professor in Behavioural Science at the London
   School of Economics and a Behavioral Science Fellow at the OECD. She is an
   affiliate of the Geary Institute for Public Policy and the Earth Institute at
   University College Dublin. Kate is a behavioral scientist whose research
   focuses on the reciprocal relationship between the wellbeing and behavior,
   with a particular focus on pro-environmental and pro-social actions and both
   consumer and employee actions.
 * Laura M. Giurge is an assistant professor of behavioral science at the London
   School of Economics. She is also a research associate of organizational
   behavior at London Business School, the Barnes Research Fellow at the
   Wellbeing Research Centre, at the University of Oxford, and a DSI Fellow at
   the University of Zurich. Her research focuses on the intersection of
   management and behavioral science and includes topics such as time,
   well-being, gender inequality, leadership, and the future of work. Follow her
   on LinkedIn here.

 * Tweet
 * Post
 * Share
 * Save
 * Get PDF
 * Buy Copies
 * Print

Read more on Organizational culture or related topics Work environments,
Corporate social responsibility and Sustainable business practices
Recommended for You


WHY YOU SHOULD ALLOW RETURNS ON CUSTOMIZED PRODUCTS

They may be harder to resell, but customers are less likely to return them
anyway.



PARTNER CENTER



Start my subscription!

EXPLORE HBR

 * The Latest
 * Most Popular
 * All Topics
 * Magazine Archive
 * The Big Idea
 * Reading Lists
 * Case Selections
 * Video
 * Podcasts
 * Webinars
 * Data & Visuals
 * My Library
 * Newsletters
 * HBR Press
 * HBR Ascend

HBR STORE

 * Article Reprints
 * Books
 * Cases
 * Collections
 * Magazine Issues
 * HBR Guide Series
 * HBR 20-Minute Managers
 * HBR Emotional Intelligence Series
 * HBR Must Reads
 * Tools

ABOUT HBR

 * Contact Us
 * Advertise with Us
 * Information for Booksellers/Retailers
 * Masthead
 * Global Editions
 * Media Inquiries
 * Guidelines for Authors
 * HBR Analytic Services
 * Copyright Permissions

MANAGE MY ACCOUNT

 * My Library
 * Topic Feeds
 * Orders
 * Account Settings
 * Email Preferences
 * Account FAQ
 * Help Center
 * Contact Customer Service

FOLLOW HBR

 * Facebook
 * Twitter
 * LinkedIn
 * Instagram
 * Your Newsreader

 * About Us
 * Careers
 * Privacy Policy
 * Cookie Policy
 * Copyright Information
 * Trademark Policy


Harvard Business Publishing:
 * Higher Education
 * Corporate Learning
 * Harvard Business Review
 * Harvard Business School

Copyright © 2022  Harvard Business School Publishing. All rights reserved.
Harvard Business Publishing is an affiliate of Harvard Business School.