(The English version follows)
上周的 Daily Productive Sharing 159 - 20210324 中提到，英国智库建议将远程办公作为默认工作方式，因为这种模式会对当地的经济产生不小的变化；今天的分享就从雇佣者和被雇佣者两方面来分析这种模式的好处。 别忘了把今天的文章分享给你的老板:)
如果你想更好地管理时间，并且减轻自己的压力，不妨试试 BRNR List
如果你也想成为更高效的人，欢迎加入我们的 TG group
如果大家使用邮件订阅，请把 firstname.lastname@example.org 添加为邮箱联系人，避免邮箱过滤的误伤，谢谢:)
Last week's Daily Productive Sharing 159 - 20210324 mentioned that a UK think tank recommended remote work as the default way of working as this model would make a not insignificant difference to the local economy; today's sharing looks at the benefits of this model from both the employees and the employers. Don't forget to share today's article with your boss :)
If you find today's sharing helpful, why not share it with your friends?
Try our sustainable productivity tool BRNR List
Please add email@example.com as your contact to avoid mislabeling the newsletter as spam.
These gains go to the employee initially.
- The dollars and time spent commuting.
- At least some of the cost of daycare.
- The cost in space/and or dollars of having to live close to work.
- Eating lunch out.
- Dressing below the waist.
And these to the employer.
- The cost of owning or renting office space.
- The cost of people devoted to maintenance of the office space (see Dropbox above).
- Any subsidy including parking spaces supporting commuting.
- The need to provide free coffee etc.
Pressman quotes a study Dropbox commissioned at The Economist which concluded that workers lose 28% of their productivity because of distractions and says this agrees with my estimate that 25 hours at home is equivalent to a 9-5 day at the office (nit, he somewhat misinterpreted the study).
WfH is not a zero-sum game. Both workers and employers benefit.