Data and Code for: "Working Remotely? Selection, Treatment and the Market for Remote Work"
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Natalia Emanuel, Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Emma Harrington, University of Virginia
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
| Replication_Package_Working_Remotely 25 April 2024 | 04/28/2024 03:07:PM |
Project Citation:
Emanuel, Natalia, and Harrington, Emma. Data and Code for: “Working Remotely? Selection, Treatment and the Market for Remote Work.” Nashville, TN: American Economic Association [publisher], 2024. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2024-08-27. https://doi.org/10.3886/E198503V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
Publicly available data and code for "Working Remotely? Selection, Treatment and the Market for Remote Work"
How does remote work affect productivity and how productive are workers who choose remote jobs? We decompose these effects in a Fortune 500 firm. Before Covid-19, remote workers answered 12% fewer calls per hour than on-site workers. After the offices closed, the productivity gap narrowed by 4%, and formerly on-site workers’ call quality and promotion rates also declined. Even with everyone remote, an 8% productivity gap persisted, indicating negative selection into remote jobs. A cost-benefit analysis indicates that the savings from remote work in reducing turnover and office rents could outweigh remote work's negative productivity impact but not the costs of attracting less productive workers.
How does remote work affect productivity and how productive are workers who choose remote jobs? We decompose these effects in a Fortune 500 firm. Before Covid-19, remote workers answered 12% fewer calls per hour than on-site workers. After the offices closed, the productivity gap narrowed by 4%, and formerly on-site workers’ call quality and promotion rates also declined. Even with everyone remote, an 8% productivity gap persisted, indicating negative selection into remote jobs. A cost-benefit analysis indicates that the savings from remote work in reducing turnover and office rents could outweigh remote work's negative productivity impact but not the costs of attracting less productive workers.
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
Remote work;
Work-from-home;
worker productivity;
selection
JEL Classification:
View help for JEL Classification
J24 Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
L23 Organization of Production
L84 Personal, Professional, and Business Services
M54 Personnel Economics: Labor Management
J24 Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
L23 Organization of Production
L84 Personal, Professional, and Business Services
M54 Personnel Economics: Labor Management
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
United State of America
Time Period(s):
View help for Time Period(s)
1/1/2019 – 10/1/2021
Data Type(s):
View help for Data Type(s)
administrative records data;
program source code
Methodology
Unit(s) of Observation:
View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Individual
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.