Work practices are adapting to technological advancements, but the pace at which this is happening is faster in some countries, where companies give teleworking a fair chance, compared to those where office hours are still expected. I think that this either/or approach to working might be effective, but it will likely evolve over time.
One reason for allowing remote work might relate to technological infrastructure. In some countries, the internet is notably more reliable, with robust digital management tools and stable cybersecurity, allowing companies to diversify their work practices and offer teleworking as an option. We should also consider modern social values. Work-life balance is not prioritized equally in all countries, with some emphasizing it significantly more, leading to employee autonomy and flexible work hours.
However, there are cultures where hierarchy is a virtue. In countries such as Japan and South Korea, employees are expected to visibly show respect for authority in the workplace, which can be challenging in a teleworking environment. There is also the issue of trust. Not all countries enjoy a high level of trust among their people, with some viewing trust as unattainable where direct supervision is absent. This is evidenced by work practices in Iran, where employers are expected to report to the office even if their jobs can be performed from home.
These discussions suggest that choosing one system over the other for any given context might have negative consequences. Remote work is possible under the right technological and cultural conditions, whereas the office-based system might be more suitable in countries with certain cultures and social norms. However, as global work becomes increasingly digitalized, a hybrid system may eventually emerge, which could be effective under all conditions and reduce rigid office expectations.
