The initiative by the Public Service to potentially introduce remote working for thousands of workers should be lauded. It is quite possibly one of the most courageous initiatives taken by a sector more renowned for its bureaucracy rather than innovative thinking.

From October, public service employees whose job performance and skills, as well as the nature of their job, make it possible to work away from traditional office set-ups, may request to work from home.

Core hours will be established by the head of department and workers will be given the necessary IT back-up during the 18-month transition plan.

Whether we like it or not, the pandemic has forced us to rethink our priorities in life, the way we manage our daily chores, and the way we work. Several companies had no choice but to introduce teleworking last year as COVID-19 numbers shot up – the results were mixed: some managers admitted that productivity improved, others said remote working was difficult to manage. Surveys showed the majority of workers were happier with the arrangement.

Before we knew it, most companies called back their employees, and it was back to business as usual.

 Our roads reverted to the usual traffic chaos, forcing thousands of workers to wonder why they were being forced to waste hours commuting when they could have been working from the comfort of their homes.

Of course, there is no one-size-fits-all solution and finding a remote solution is a lot more complex than an in-person 9-to-5 model.

We cannot expect, for example, teachers to do their job efficiently without any physical interaction at all with students. On the other hand, accountants can easily navigate through their numbers on screen.

Companies are right to remain concerned about reduced productivity, security issues and possible software costs. But it will be short-sighted if they fail to at least experiment different work practices in a fast-changing world.

Statistics sourced from leading research institutions, including Gallup, Harvard University and Stanford University, show that teleworkers are an average of 35-40 per cent more productive than their office counterparts.

More than half (54 per cent) of employees say they would change jobs for one that offered them more flexibility, which results in an average of 12 per cent turnover reduction after a remote work agreement is offered.  Employees feel less stressed when they have a flexible work environment and why shouldn’t bosses do their utmost to keep their workers happy?

Of course, on the flip side, it is a fact that office-based working and face-to-face interactions make collaboration easier and foster deeper bonds and trust. It allows employees to socialise with colleagues, chat during breaks and discuss ideas to help them innovate. For those working from home, there could be distractions and a feeling of alienation and disengagement among employees.

Those who feel demotivated working from home should be given the option to work in an office environment.

The solution mainly lies in hybrid models, which, if implemented correctly, gives employees more freedom about when they can work and where they can work from. This autonomy and flexibility is likely to improve job satisfaction.

But the cultural shift has to start with top management, which needs to change decades-long practices that have never been challenged, and which never took into consideration the massive advances in technology.

Such a shift in mindsets will help us shape the future of our workspaces and routines. If the civil service, with thousands of workers and with a reputation for being reluctant to change, can do it, then everybody can.