IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/rwirep/1026.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mismatch in preferences for working from home: Evidence from discrete choice experiments with workers and employers

Author

Listed:
  • Lewandowski, Piotr
  • Lipowska, Katarzyna
  • Smoter, Mateusz

Abstract

We study preferences for remote work using a large-scale discrete choice study with 10,000 workers and 1,500 employers in Poland. Workers value remote work more than employers. On average, workers are willing to sacrifice 2.9% of earnings for remote work, with hybrid work from home (WFH) for 2-3 days (5.1%) preferred over 5 days (0.6%). Employers expect a 21.0% wage cut from remote workers. This 18 pp gap between employers' and workers' valuations reflects employers' concerns over productivity loss (14 pp) and effort to manage remote workers (4 pp). Only 25-36% of employers with positive perceptions of remote work productivity show valuations of remote work that align with workers' willingness to pay for it.

Suggested Citation

  • Lewandowski, Piotr & Lipowska, Katarzyna & Smoter, Mateusz, 2023. "Mismatch in preferences for working from home: Evidence from discrete choice experiments with workers and employers," Ruhr Economic Papers 1026, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:rwirep:1026
    DOI: 10.4419/96973192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/273358/1/1851485201.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4419/96973192?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lee, Kangoh, 2023. "Working from home as an economic and social change: A review," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brum, Matias & De Rosa, Mauricio, 2021. "Too little but not too late: nowcasting poverty and cash transfers’ incidence during COVID-19’s crisis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    2. Filippos Petroulakis, 2023. "Task Content and Job Losses in the Great Lockdown," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 76(3), pages 586-613, May.
    3. Matías Brum & Mauricio de Rosa, 2020. "Too little but not too late. Nowcasting poverty and cash transfers' incidence in Uruguay during COVID-19's crisis," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 20-09, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    4. Alex Chernoff & Casey Warman, 2023. "COVID-19 and implications for automation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(17), pages 1939-1957, April.
    5. Norlander, Peter & Erickson, Christopher, 2022. "The Role of Institutions in Job Teleworkability Before and After the Covid-19 Pandemic," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1172, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    6. Blanas, Sotiris & Oikonomou, Rigas, 2023. "COVID-induced economic uncertainty, tasks and occupational demand," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    7. Guido Matias Cortes & Eliza Forsythe, 2023. "Heterogeneous Labor Market Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 76(1), pages 30-55, January.
    8. Sangmin Aum & Sang Yoon (Tim) Lee & Yongseok Shin, 2022. "Who Should Work from Home During a Pandemic? The Wage-Infection Trade-off," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 104(2), pages 92-109.
    9. Oikonomou, Myrto & Pierri, Nicola & Timmer, Yannick, 2023. "IT shields: Technology adoption and economic resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2022. "Mismatch in preferences for working from home – evidence from discrete choice experiments with workers and employers," IBS Working Papers 05/2022, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    11. Chiarello, Filippo & Fantoni, Gualtiero & Hogarth, Terence & Giordano, Vito & Baltina, Liga & Spada, Irene, 2021. "Towards ESCO 4.0 – Is the European classification of skills in line with Industry 4.0? A text mining approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    12. Kunal Dasgupta & Srinivasan Murali, 2024. "Pandemic containment and inequality in a developing economy," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 837-864, April.
    13. Leonardo Bonilla-Mejía & Luz A. Florez & Didier Hermida & Francisco Lasso & Leonardo Fabio Morales & Juan Jose Ospina & José Pulido, 2023. "Is the COVID-19 Pandemic Fast-Tracking Automation in Developing Countries? Evidence from Colombia," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(4), pages 593-616.
    14. L'aszl'o Czaller & GergH{o} T'oth & Bal'azs Lengyel, 2021. "Vaccine allocation to blue-collar workers," Papers 2104.04639, arXiv.org.
    15. Stefano Magrini & Alessandro Spiganti, 2024. "A tale of two cities: Communication, innovation, and divergence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 390-413, January.
    16. Koch, Philipp & Köppl-Turyna, Monika, 2021. "International mobile Arbeitskräfte: Der neue Standortwettbewerb," Policy Notes 47, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Nicolaj S{o}ndergaard Muhlbach, 2021. "occ2vec: A principal approach to representing occupations using natural language processing," Papers 2111.02528, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    18. Bert Van Landeghem & Thomas Dohmen & Arne Risa Hole & Annemarie Künn-Nelen, 2024. "The Value of Commuting Time, Flexibility, and Job Security: Evidence from Current and Recent Jobseekers in Flanders," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 322, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    19. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Gómez-Herrera, Estrella, 2022. "Mobility restrictions and the substitution between on-site and remote work: Empirical evidence from a European online labour market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    20. Aum, Sangmin, 2022. "The Impact of COVID-19 on Jobs in Korea: Does Contact-intensiveness Matter?," KDI Journal of Economic Policy, Korea Development Institute (KDI), vol. 44(2), pages 1-28.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Working from home; remote work; discrete choice experiment; willingness to pay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J21 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Force and Employment, Size, and Structure
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • J81 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Working Conditions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:rwirep:1026. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rwiesde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.