A collaborative approach towards the future of work

REMOTE work: yay or nay? Whichever camp you stand in, the debate is set to rage on. Elon Musk has called remote work a “Covid-era privilege”, while others including prominent economists continue to argue for its potential to positively transform workplaces and urban living. Amazon, after its heavy-handed approach to its five-day-per-week in-office policy, has now delayed the return to office. And, closer to home, Grab has mandated a return to the office. On the flipside, others such as Spotify remain committed to flexible arrangements.

The tenuous part of the current conversation is that each party, whether it is the employee calling for more flexibility or the CEO seeking more in-office interaction, is prioritising their own interests while sidelining other important considerations. This needs to change.

The fundamental shift towards remote work is not only a change in how we work, but also how we live and how and where we travel. The wider implications of remote working – the shift towards or away from it – should be given greater attention with input from all stakeholders to ensure equitable and long-term benefits for the whole of society.

The multifaceted implications of remote work: A complex landscape

Unsurprisingly, there is no consensus around remote and hybrid working. For decades, working from the office has been the default approach, a policy entrenched into modern society’s relationship with work. Everything from urban infrastructure to family dynamics has been shaped by this paradigm. Central business districts (CBDs) exemplify this, thriving on a dense, regularly commuting workforce. Childcare systems worldwide are designed to complement standard office hours. Retail, transportation systems, urban planning and even housing markets are interconnected with the traditional work-from-office structure.

What do we know? We know that reduced commuting can lower carbon emissions from transport under most circumstances, aligning with Singapore’s eco-friendly goals; at the same time, the changing work environment has led to concerns about social isolation, mental health challenges and limited career advancement opportunities. For cities, fewer daily commuters has diminished the economic vibrancy of CBDs, leading to declining retail activity, rising office vacancies, and the need for urban planners to rethink transportation infrastructure and housing markets.

Where are we at this crossroads? Unfortunately, evidence-based approaches to the future of work remain limited. A majority of past research has been modelled around a centralised office work environment, while existing research around the effects of work location primarily focuses on a single impact, such as employee productivity or rush-hour travel demand, making it hard for policymakers to understand the holistic picture. In addition, these frameworks often fail to account for the rapidly changing realities of the future of work, where remote workers might work from a variety of different locations depending on their needs for the day.

Reimagining the way forward through collaboration

The Singapore government’s introduction of regulations requiring all companies to have a process for employees to request flexible work arrangements is a step in the right direction. But what’s next?

With an issue that has such wide-ranging impacts on society, a whole-of-society effort is needed. We’ve seen how this has worked in addressing other societal challenges. Singapore’s urban planning model, which integrates insights from economists, environmentalists and sociologists, has created one of the world’s most liveable cities.

When it comes to the future of work, how might such a collaborative approach look? The Irish government’s National Remote Work Strategy gives us a glimpse into this – balancing the benefits of remote work with its challenges by establishing a nationwide network of remote working hubs to ensure equitable access to third spaces for work.

Still, more needs to be done, as set out in a recent paper by the Mens, Manus and Machina (M3S) Interdisciplinary Research Group (IRG) of Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART), MIT’s research enterprise in Singapore titled The need for an interdisciplinary approach to remote work and urban policy, published in Nature Cities, also gives stakeholders a new lens to evaluate the future of work, assess the implications and formulate policies.

First, move the conversation out of the boardroom and also give a seat to economists, organisational behaviour specialists, urban planners, sociologists, transportation experts, human resources professionals and change management consultants.

Next, rethink the impacted stakeholders beyond just the employer-employee relationship to include other facets of society – the effects of a changing work environment impacts each individual beyond their role as an employee and carries on into their personal lives. This means considering how future work policies affect the various aspects of an individual’s life – as an employee, parent, caregiver, community member and more.

By offering a new lens to view and understand the future of work, this comprehensive map would account for the interrelationships among these stakeholders, set an agenda, as well as better inform the decision-making process.

In this context, the consideration of employees’ work arrangements would take into account factors such as income, personal well-being, opportunities for social connection, access to technology and how their daily life before and after working hours may be affected. Employers, on the other hand, must rethink organisational structure, culture and leadership as well as deal with productivity, employee satisfaction and operational costs.

Service providers – including co-working spaces, public transportation and retail – will need to evolve to maintain value and contend with changing traffic patterns and workforce needs. Policymakers, with their ability to set incentives and regulations, will need to consider the impact of remote work on land use, labour laws, education and training, social safety nets and other secondary societal impacts. These interconnected considerations and relationships collectively shape the evolving ecosystem of work.

For instance, public transit projects can be redesigned based on data-driven models to reflect emerging commuting patterns, ensuring they remain adaptable and relevant in a landscape where diverse work arrangements – be it remote, hybrid or in-office – coexist.

Addressing disparities in access to technology and infrastructure is also critical for ensuring that all workers can reap the benefits of remote work if they choose. This could involve creating low-cost co-working spaces in public libraries for those who do not have a remote work-friendly home environment, or requiring employers to offset the costs of new IT equipment for remote workers.

Shaping the future of work and urban life: A shared responsibility

The evolving work landscape is not just a corporate issue; it’s a societal one. Engaging the broader public effectively through mechanisms such as surveys, town halls or forums on work-life balance can foster inclusivity and transparency. These approaches not only help build trust but also ensure that diverse voices are heard, leading to more equitable outcomes.

With the pandemic firmly in the rearview mirror and companies continuing to experiment with remote, hybrid or fully in-office work policies, it is imperative for stakeholders to prioritise data-driven approaches to fully understand the societal impact of remote work. Standardising data collection, expanding cross-disciplinary research and refining analytical models will enable policymakers and employers to make informed decisions for sustainable, flexible and vibrant cities in a world where work arrangements will continue to ebb and flow.

Professor Jinhua Zhao is lead principal investigator at M3S IRG of SMART, MIT’s research enterprise in Singapore. Dr Nicholas Caros is a policy analyst at the International Transport Forum, part of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.