INESC TEC working in slippers

A good title for this article also would be “INESC – teleworking since 2004!”. Starting in the present, this dreadful COVID-19 pandemic pushed us into teleworking in an abrupt, forced and almost “savage” way. I think it’s safe to say that for the majority of INESC TEC employees, the adaptation to telework has not been very difficult. In fact, people had already experienced it in some way or another, due to the dissemination of fundamental technologies and their omnipresent use. However, is this technology and digital literacy sufficient to telework in the most appropriate way?

I don’t know exactly when telework started, at least in the way we perceive it today (the concept is vague and imprecise in the Portuguese legislation). But I believe it began during the advent of the first personal computers and data communications, using the “good old” modems over the analogue telephone lines – which started to take off in the 1980s and gained momentum in the 1990s, following the great spread of the Internet, particularly after the emergence of web browsers. However, it was only during the first decade of the 2000s that teleworking gained legal recognition in Portugal – more specifically in 2003, according to the information I was able to collect. More laws on telework were published in 2009, 2015 and 2020. However, and knowing that laws are usually published to regulate an already existing activity, there is a possibility that telework was already in force way before that. In fact, in large American cities, working at home was already a quite common practice.

In 2003, INESC Porto (as INESC TEC was known at the time) had the opportunity to carry out a teleworking experience, in order to study various aspects, from technological to labour-related (it is interesting to say that, at that time, doctoral theses were being done on this topic). INESC Porto, through the Information and Communication Systems Unit (USIC, currently CSIG), was one of the partners of the Pêndulo project, co-funded by the EQUAL EU Initiative. The main objective of this project was to promote equal opportunities between men and women through initiatives aimed at reconciling family and professional life, thus contributing to increase the quality of life of working citizens.

One of those initiatives, focused on implementing new methods of work organisation in different employing entities, was teleworking. This experience at INESC Porto took place in 2004. In addition to INESC Porto, this initiative involved the National Association of Businesswomen, the Employment and

Professional Training Institute, the municipality of Valongo, Salvador Caetano, the Faculty of Psychology,

the Porto Trade Union Confederation, the Union of Office, Services and Trade Workers, the National Family Services Coordination and the Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment.

Nine INESC Porto employees from two Units (the others did not take part) and Services, participated directly in this experience. Technical services provided support, and the first dedicated VPN server was purchased. Users mostly used their equipment, although there was support in the purchase of webcams (a rare thing at the time). ADSL was used for communications, Internet via cable TV, and even via satellite, in a case in rural areas. The main software tool was Messenger., The project comprised the creation of a methodology for implementing teleworking in institutions. That methodology included an initial assessment phase, a selection of workers with the appropriate profile, and a piloting period that lasted six months, in order to address the issues that may have arisen before the general adoption of telework. This type of methodology required the adaptation of the management approach, in order to make it more goal-oriented. Similarly, the evaluation process must also be adapted to this type of work. In addition, there are laws that regulate teleworking and companies have to comply with them. Also important was the analysis of the work conditions at home (having specific rooms designated for work, desks, adequate lighting, children at home, etc.), as well as the costs that arise from the fact that workers are using their own resources (electricity, water and more).

I would like to point out some aspects of the Pêndulo project that may still be useful today, given that this article will not focus on all the outcomes of the project in detail. Hence, as key advantages, it is important to highlight: extra motivation (greater creativity and concentration, leading to less wasted time); better quality of life and greater balance between work and family life; flexibility (the work periods are established according to the needs the company); cost savings (less travel expenses and more time saved, particularly in traffic – which is also good for the environment); better time management and personal discipline (need to plan activities in advance and coordinate them with the team) and benefits in terms of the organisation’s image. As problems to consider, I’d select the following: need for adequate conditions and technical assistance; the entire organisation must be involved (without the involvement of all divisions, teleworking becomes impractical); need for monitoring and support at the first stages of implementation; risk of losing contact with the team and resistance to change (the participation of managers is essential, as well as the volunteering of all employees involved); tendency to work more hours.

This initiative was widely disseminated in the media, particularly in BIP – where one can still read some articles related to the project – and in national newspapers; RTP also did a story on Pêndulo. The project was also presented during a meeting with INESC Porto Units Council (2005), but its adoption was not entirely accepted, despite the strong support showed by some people (praise where praise is due). As far as I know, until this damned pandemic (and with rare exceptions), teleworking at INESC TEC was left to the discretion of those in charge, and carried out in an essentially unofficial way, never actually assumed.

We were forced to adopt the telework system (with some exceptions, of course) and according to the reports, it is going quite well – whatever that means. We’ve improved the technical resources, and they have never been as good as now. Some processes and procedures have been adapted, and everyone realises the need to keep working this way. Moreover, people are happy to work at an institution that is pretty much dematerialised – despite those who work with hardware or in the laboratories, and a few more who live from material reality.

I don’t really know what will happen in the future, but I think that nothing will be the same as before, because our habits have changed, and our minds have necessarily changed too. We are now aware – hopefully, all of us – that this pandemic will last for months or even years, which will make us keep working this way. However, we ought to think about the answers to some questions: since the pandemic is going to last, how will we address certain aspects of telecommuting, like legal or material elements? Or even aspects related to evaluation processes or team cohesion? Does INESC TEC need so many physical facilities? Isn’t this a good a time to rethink the way we’ve organised our work?

Honestly, I am a fan of teleworking, but not on a full-time basis, nor under the current conditions, which the crisis situation forced us to. I miss seeing people, having lunch with them, meeting them in the halls and laughing with silly circumstantial jokes. We need to see each other, greet each other. This crisis will end someday, but I hope we take this this opportunity to rethink the adoption of teleworking and to transform it into an additional resource for motivating people.