Back to top
Page ContentsIntroduction and Caveat Success Stories and Positive Examples Other Stories and Pitfalls to Be Avoided Barriers to Telework
Introduction and CaveatTelework projects, telework centers et al have had a very mixed track record over this past decade. There have of course a certain number of successes (otherwise we wouldn’t be here) – though virtually all of these of course have areas in which they can be improved. But there have also been a fair share of duds, poorly conceived projects which have failed in any of a variety of ways or otherwise missed the mark. The purpose of this section is to draw attention to salient examples of both from which we call can learn.
Projects succeed because they have been carefully and realistically planned, because they have learned the lessons of the past, and because they have been brought on line with a clear set of objectives, strong local support, and an ability to adapt and improve as they go along. The strong telework project is one that is feedback-intensive, and feedback-aware. This means of course a very energetic style of operations and management, together with considerable flexibility for adaptation and improvement. Unfortunately these are not often the qualities that are found in public sector bureaucracies or in academia, but this we shall see here from the examples that will eventually be brought to our attention.
Please click the Discussion icon above (or email the conference postmaster) to inform us of your candidate projects for inclusion in this section. It would be helpful if you could supply us not only with the appropriate URL address for the Web page, but also if you would be so kind as to give the meeting a short summary statement (even as little as 100 words or so) which explains why this particular project is worth our attention.
As much as anything else the problem appears to arise because there is a noted tendency on the part of those who manage to fund such projects with taxpayer money to ‘declare victory’ well in advance. "Here is our project, this is how it looks and it all works to perfection." Which by and large is the news that dominate the press and official literature. Problem is that once these centers or programs actually get up and working, and in the process begin to run into the intricate web of real world behavior, needs and priorities, often as not they turn out to offer a very poor fit.
What happens then? The typical pattern seems to be that such projects simply go on to languish for a while, and then one day are either quietly closed down or recycled into some other uses. The quiet that follows is deafening. Rarely is an independent audit of such projects carried out, and even more rarely is it made public. Thus it is that valuable lessons of experience are not available, and all we have to judge the past from are the press releases vaunting the new projects glorious and golden future.
Thus, we are hoping here is to see what can be gathered by way of solid, useful information on past projects which have blundered – not so much because we get any particular pleasure in picking on those who tried to make them work, but rather because we feel strongly that this is valuable information which should be widely available.
Thus, we would ask you here to let us know about projects which have gone astray, and, every bit as important, why they went wrong and what kept them from being adjusted and improved.
Pleas click the Discussion icon above or email the conference postmaster to share this information with the rest of the conference. Once again, it would be useful if you could add to the links or background information a short statement of your own as to why it is useful to understand the realities of this particular example.
What you have here is thus not a theoretical view. It should not, however, be treated as something which is or really can be final or definitive. It provides a snapshot of a dynamic, fast evolving process taken at one point in time. That said, this report points up a number of real problems, and a few opportunities, to which we hope the Commission, and perhaps our colleagues at the European Telework Development Initiative will choose to give their close attention in the weeks and months ahead. There is, as you will see, quite a bit that needs to be done in order to permit this important new sector of economic activity to take its full and rightful place in what is increasingly an Information Society. And the people and the groups that are out there in the economy trying to do their best with these tools are deserving of this support.
 Track Home |
 Author Bio
|
 Your Comments
|
 Send E-mail
|