working from home and is benefits solution

As it relates to the media, the transition to a work from home environment has created both efficiencies and issues within the industry. Working for home has allowed media companies and professional to maintain business operations through the pandemic. However, working from home has caused workers to work much longer hours as their work does not leave their home. In addition, the longer hours have created high stress levels within media personnel as they grapple with multiple responsibilities. Finally, working from home has caused certain individuals to experience mental health issues related to COVID-19 related stress. Many pundits have offered various solutions to these problems with many businesses adopting a variety of approaches to mitigate the risks of working from home. In all there are three primary responses to the work from home issue. The first response is to allow media to work from home permanently. The second response is to have all media personnel return to the office once properly vaccinated. The third response is a combination of the first two, which allows media personnel to return to the office but on a limited basis (Bick, 2020).
The first option for media industry to all personnel to work from home permanently. Here, the solution from a business standpoint allows the business to significantly reduce overhead. For one, media companies will need less space for their employees. This will lower rental expense as well as other expense related to maintenance of the building. If the media company owns the land, they will also pay less taxes as they utilize less space. These savings can be used to increase employee salaries or innovate their product offerings such as online media offerings. The negative of this solution relates to company culture and its preservation. By having staff permanently work from home it will be difficult for the company to maintains its culture and the benefits of an office environment (Arntz, 2019). The ability to share thoughts and opinions in a face to face meeting is lost. In addition, the spontaneity of innovation and interactions is lost. Another negative element is related to employees and their ability to disconnect from work. Research has shown that personnel that work from home tend to have higher stress levels as they work longer hours. This could ultimately negative impact the company as it relates to higher turnover and higher sick leave (Baker, 2007)
The second solution would look to bring employees back to the office once properly vaccinated. For the media industry, this would allow operations to continue in the same manner as pre pandemic. Here employees will look to return to the office once vaccinated to resume their normal duties. Media companies are looking to upgrade their overall premises with better HVAC equipment, temperature checkers and additional barriers between cubicles. Other media companies are expanding their office space to better accommodate social distancing rules and regulations. With this solution, the positives allow employees to work together as done prior to the pandemic. It also allows for the seamless exchange of ideas, training, innovations, and culture. The negative elements are limited in this situation. Media companies will typically need to invest in better ventilation systems and equipment to protect their employees. These investments can be costly in term of upfront requirements. However, these investments are needed to make employees feel secure in the work environment (Baruch, 2000).
The final, and arguable the best solution for the media industry is a combination of the above two solutions. In this case, employees can come back to work in the physical office, but on a limited basis. Here the media company can allow employees to work from home 2 to 3 days per week. The other days, employees are required to be in the office. This solution benefits media companies as it allows for the benefits of physical space to remain intact. It allows for the company to retain and preserve its culture internally. It also allows for proper training of employees and through in-person face to face contact. The solution further alleviates the burden that is placed on employees who work from home as they detach from work properly to focus on other responsibilities. This does however provide employees with the flexibility to work from home in the event that they need to. By having this flexibility, this solution can reduce employee stress as they have options. From a company perspective, working from home adds to the benefits to the employee base. An attractive work from home policy can lower employee turnover while also increasing job satisfaction. Higher job satisfaction also leads to more productivity and innovation which is highly needed in the media industry (Bae, 2016). From a negative standpoint, this solution much like the others, will require a large capital investment on the part of the media company. For one they will need to invest heavily in work from home infrastructure and the associated maintenance costs. These costs include investments in servers, storage, security, and personnel to manage the entire system. The costs will also include physical investments in computer monitors, laptops, computer accessories and insurance on these items. In conjunction with the above investments, the firm will also be required to invest in its physical locations as well. This will include improve HVAC and ventilation systems, improved barriers to help alleviate the spread of gems of other contagions, temperature monitoring equipment and much more. Each of these investments may not have a revenue stream attached to them and are instead mitigation investments related to the virus. Those who don’t have the financial capability to make these investments will have difficulty implementing this solution.
References
1. Arntz, M., B. Y. Sarra, and F. Berlingieri. 2019. “Working from Home: Heterogeneous Effects on Hours Worked and Wages.” ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. Mannheim, Germany, 19-015. Retrieved from 10.2139/ssrn.3383408.
2. Bae, K. B., and D. Kim. 2016. “The Impact of Decoupling of Telework on Job Satisfaction in U.S. federal Agencies: does Gender Matter?” The American Review of Public Administration 46 (3): 356–371. doi:10.1177/0275074016637183.
3. Baker, E., G. C. Avery, and J. Crawford. 2007. “Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity When Professionals Work from Home.” Research & Practice in Human Resource Management 15 (1): 37–62.
4. Baruch, Y. (2000). Teleworking: benefits and pitfalls as perceived by professionals and managers. New Technology, Work and Employment, 15(1), 34–49. doi:10.1111/1468-005x.00063
5. Bick, A., A. Blandin, and K. Mertens. 2020. “Work from Home After the COVID-19 Outbreak.” CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP15000. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3650114