Can smart working be considered a standard work tool today? The concept of smart working, although regulated by Law No. 81 of May 22, 2017, subsequently amended by Law No. 122 of August 4, 2022, has become part of the everyday language of men and women and in working practices during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Smart working has been used in Italy by millions of workers who, following the restrictions imposed to stem the spread of the pandemic, were forced to stay home.
Analysis of questionnaire data
This article was born from the analysis of data from a questionnaire designed for university research as part of a labor economics exam. The initial question was to understand the extent to which smart working could be considered a standard work tool for balancing work and family life.
The questionnaire was structured in several parts and the data collected are very interesting.
Before delving into the data analysis and discussion, let's take a look at smart working.
Smart working as a standard work tool?
Previously, few organizations used this tool for work. The numbers speak for themselves. According to data collected by ISTAT, before Covid-19, only 3,6% of public administrations included smart working as a standard work tool. A radical change occurred in 2020. ISTAT data also revealed an exponential increase in smart working, from 3,6% to 58,9%.
The reasons for this increase, even in the years immediately following, are partly linked to the restrictions issued by the government during the pandemic. Many companies have rethought and reorganized their work methods to the point of considering smart working a standard work tool.
The regulatory vision of smart working
The applicable legislation is Law No. 81 of 22 May 2017, as amended: " Measures for the protection of non-entrepreneurial self-employment and measures aimed at promoting flexible working hours and locations for subordinate employment ." In Chapter II of the aforementioned Law, the articles concerning smart working range from 18 to 24.
Article 18 clearly clarifies the principles. The primary goal is to increase competitiveness and facilitate work-life balance. The latter, organized into phases, cycles, and objectives, is completed without specific constraints regarding time and location. Therefore, work is performed by objectives. Work performance must not exceed the maximum daily/weekly working hours, which are based on national legislation and collective bargaining agreements. Paragraph 3-bis of Article 18 introduces an important point for smart working users.
A real opportunity to facilitate life and work schedules, in fact, states that " employers [...] are required in any case to give priority to requests for agile working arrangements made by workers with children up to twelve years of age, or without any age limit in the case of children with disabilities ." A real help for parenting. The same paragraph defines priority, when receiving requests, also for workers with disabilities or who are caregivers . Depending on the timing, the agile working agreement can be fixed-term (and therefore requires renewal) or permanent.
Some important points
The Ministry of Labor and Social Policies views it as "a method of implementing a subordinate employment relationship characterized by the absence of time or space constraints and an organization of phases, cycles, and objectives, established by agreement between the employee and the employer; a method that helps the worker balance work and family life and, at the same time, fosters increased productivity ." It emphasizes organizational flexibility, the willingness of the parties based on trust, and the signing of an individual employment agreement. This agreement must be strictly written.
One of the key aspects enshrined in the Law concerns the equal treatment, both financially and legally, that must be guaranteed to workers who opt for smart working, compared to colleagues who do not avail themselves of this right, or who perform their work in the usual manner.
For this reason, protection is provided in the event of accidents and occupational diseases, according to the procedures set forth in INAIL circular no. 48/2017. Furthermore, paragraph 3-bis of Article 18 of Law no. 81/2017 establishes that workers who request smart working " may not be penalized, demoted, fired, transferred, or subjected to any other organizational measure that has a direct or indirect negative effect on working conditions ." Continuous training must also be guaranteed, as established in Article 20, which specifically addresses the right to lifelong learning.
Where are we at?
Smart working presupposes a genuine cultural (as well as economic and social) shift. A greater impact is felt on managerial culture, as managers will be the ones to enable or hinder this change. Companies, both public and private, are completely rethinking their ways of working, resulting in a genuine rethinking of the activities and methods involved in carrying out work in relation to workers' roles.
With Directive No. 3 of 2017 on smart working, signed by the Prime Minister and Minister Madia, smart working was also introduced in public administrations. This Directive contains the prerequisites for the implementation of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 14 of Law No. 124 of 7 August 2015, which delegated the Government to reorganize public administrations. It envisaged the introduction of new and more flexible work-life balance measures for employees. The adoption of these organizational measures and the achievement of the objectives defined in the aforementioned regulations constitute a genuine evaluation within the framework of corporate performance measurement processes, both at the organizational level and for employees.
The questionnaire data
The data collected through the questionnaire is very important. It helped us understand workers' perspectives and the strengths and weaknesses of smart working. It was also important to understand how smart working could be viewed as a standard work tool. Responses to the questionnaire were recorded anonymously via the Google Drive platform. Data processing led to the creation of graphs that better visually illustrate the responses recorded and the results achieved. After structuring, the questionnaire was made available from July 15, 2024, to August 04, 2024.
The questionnaire, divided into two sections, consisted of 20 questions, mostly multiple-choice. Only a few questions had open-ended answers.
276 respondents responded, making the sample fairly representative. Let's now define its characteristics. 69,9% of the sample was female, while 30,1% was male.
The characteristics of the sample
In relation to the age of the sample, the highest percentage recorded is 33,3% for the 29-38 age group; this is followed by 24,6% for the 39-49 age group; with lower, but significant, percentages being 19,6% and 17,4% for the 49-58 and 59-68 age groups, respectively. The lowest percentage recorded is 5,1% for the 18-28 age group. Continuing with the characteristics of the population sample, 65,6% declare themselves married/cohabiting, 25% of the sample is single, and 9,1% is separated/divorced.
In relation to the number of family members, the highest percentage is 28,6%, or 2 members; 25,4% is made up of 4 members, and 23,9% is made up of 3. The lowest percentages are 14,5% and 7,6%, or 1 member and 5 or more members, respectively.
In relation to employment status, the highest percentages recorded concern 39,5% private sector employees and 36,2% public sector employees.
The characteristics of smart working
Once the characteristics of the sample population have been defined, we move on to analyzing the percentages derived from the responses to the more specific questions about smart working. A clear 100% positive response was recorded for the question: " Have you heard of smart working before? " This was followed by the question: " Has anyone in the company/organization where you work ever taken advantage of this opportunity before the Covid-19 emergency? " As can be seen from the graph, 57,6% of the sample had not used this working method before the pandemic. This is a very relevant finding for our research. It helps us understand how radically things have changed since Covid-19 and how, precisely, this work tool has been almost reinvented for routine use.
The fact that many companies have never used smart working as a regular work tool outlines what has since been defined as a cultural shift for this type of work.
However, the 42,4% who answered affirmatively to the same question should not be underestimated, demonstrating that some people were already working in agile mode.
A question of trust for smart working
One of the cornerstones of smart working is trust between the parties. In this regard, we asked: " Smart working is primarily based on trust between the parties, namely between the employer and the employee. In your opinion, on a scale of 1 to 5, how much would your employer trust your work outside the company/organization? "
We decided to structure this question using a satisfaction scale to provide clearer, even graphical, results. The 43,1% score for a "5" is very significant, indicating that workers perceive their employers to trust them. However, an intermediate 15,2% score of "3" is also recorded, a sort of borderline between whether or not the employer would trust them.
The concept of trust is the foundation of smart working and is crucial for effective collaboration not only between employers and employees, but also between colleagues. Obviously, in practice, a good relationship of trust is associated with good and clear communication.
Positive and negative aspects
Regarding performance in terms of achieving objectives, 71,9% responded affirmatively, saying that working from home helps them better achieve their goals. This is an important finding that undoubtedly ties in with the positive aspects of smart working. Working from home brings workers psychological benefits and, obviously, financial savings. This perhaps helps them concentrate better and achieve their goals more easily, being more mentally free.
Significant percentages include 69,2% for " saving money in getting to work ," 67,8% for " independent time management in relation to achieving objectives ," and 65,9% for " flexible hours ." These factors certainly contribute to optimal achievement of objectives because the worker is also less stressed by 38,8%.
On the other hand, we also see what the negative aspects of Smart Working are, among which, immediately striking, the 69,6% for the indicator “ tends to isolate the individual ”.
Working physically in the office encourages colleagues to interact with each other, but working from home means losing some of this connection. Furthermore, 26,1% of respondents stated they didn't know what was happening in the office. This would also lead to a sort of " exclusion " for 6,2%, while 25,4% felt cut off from the physical office.
The surprising, yet starkly contrasting, figure is the 47,5% who " tend not to keep work-life balance separate ." This is surprising because when asked, " How important do you think it is to balance work and private life? " On a scale of 1 to 5, 85,5% gave it a score of 5, meaning that balancing work and private life is indeed important.
Life time and work time
We can see that, while it's important to balance work and life, in some cases this can become a double-edged sword. Among the negative aspects is that workers risk being unable to separate the two areas and even feeling alienated from the office. For 90,9% of the sample, having a workspace at home is important.
In the questionnaire, we structured a single open-ended question, specifically: " Why, in your opinion, was the reality of Smart Working so little known ?" Many answers were repeated, and the most popular ones highlighted the role of the employer, stating, for example, that:
- "Employers don't trust employees";
- "Employee Control Culture";
- "The employer wants to see the hours worked on paper";
- "I think employers want to have some sort of "control" over their workers and tend to distrust their workers' work. Only after experiencing it do they understand how useful it can be.".
Similar responses followed one another, also highlighting the fact that, beyond what is thought about the relationship of trust between employer and employee, Italy was not ready for this working method and was unprepared even though the relevant legislation was in force even before the pandemic emergency ( Before Covid-19? The relevant legislation was a couple of years old and changes (especially in mentality) are not that rapid ; Why was smart working never really tried until, thanks to Covid, we were forced to try it and were able to verify both its positive and negative aspects ).
The relationship between work and family
An important insight emerges when analyzing the questions posed about smart working and its relationship with parenting. 89,5% believe that parents should work remotely wherever possible. Equally significant is the 61,2% survey, which believes that smart working for parents should be permitted as a family support policy.
Finally, 63,8% said that after the Covid-19 emergency, the companies they work for have considered smart working as a standard work tool, and 61,6% said that the companies where they work have adopted internal regulations for its use.
Smart working has so much potential, and if all companies were to make it a standard work tool, there would be a radical shift in the way we understand work in terms of productivity, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency.
I graduated in Sociology with a specialization in Social and Territorial Policies, and earned a master's degree in E-Government and E-Management in Public Administration. I love reading and writing. For me, sociology means experiencing everyday life in all its nuances and nuances. Today, I am an Administrative Assistant at the IRCCS Burlo Garofolo in Trieste, and above all, I am a wife and mother, the greatest asset of all.
