Hi,

Why one or the other when it has to be both? Like for any "application" you need HR to provide the framework (insurance, what is acceptable and what is not, compensation package if any...) as well as IT who has to provided a policy aligned compliant & secure solution.

So like for any SAP rollout both business (general management & HR) and IT have to interact to define strategy and implement it. IT in its advisory role can suggest and promote importance of telecommuting and be very pro-active on pushing the concept but "IT" certainly cannot decide on the finer HR issues that need to be set when telecommuting moves from "under the cover & tolerated" and henceforth marginal usage to a mainstream work organisation tool.

Claude

Why not the CFO? In most organizations, both entities report to this position.

Is this another situation of the blind men describing the elephant? Those that can lead should lead but the complex issue of telecommuting requires experts from multiple sources including but not limited to human resources, information technology, and security.Telecommuting is in our future; we need to work collaboratively to find a solution that effectively and efficiently serves the needs of our organizations.

It has to be HR because it is applicable to far more people than just IT. However, IT must be heavily involved, in that the company must have the right technology to be able to implement telecommuting (highly secure remote access, plus, if necessary, technology to ensure the people are actually working). My recommendation would be to have the project headed by HR, but with IT being the pilot for the company. In this way, IT can work out the technical issues before the company rolls it out to the general population.

There are a lot of HR and organizational issues around telecommuting. Which positions and which particular employees are best suited for this? How many days per week for not coming in, and which days are reserved for meetings at the office? How do we train bosses to supervise telecommuters? For that matter, how do we identify bosses who will be comfortable with it? How do we create the right telecommuting culture, so people still feel connected and engaged in their work and the company's success? Are we OK with telecommuters working from home, or do we prefer they go to a remote work site close to home? If they work from home, how do we deal with security, property, and home office tax deductions?

Then we get into the IT issues. Do we want telecommuters to work with full-function PC's, or thin clients with no storage? Can we extend our VPN's to worker homes or remote work sites? How can we assure adequate information security and privacy? What collaboration tools do we need? How do we share presentations?

The bottom line: build a task force of business, HR and IT managers to thrash out these issues, draft a white paper, then go with a pilot to test how well the policies work. Be prepared to modify them as experience dictates. Gas prices are not likely to be much lower in 2010 than they are now, so the driving forces are there; you can get ahead of the curve or be drowned in the oncoming wave.

Perhaps the bigger issue is who provides the vision on this issue. Currently, this is a phenomenon driven by grass-roots needs. Senior management everywhere appears to have pretty much ignored this trend for years and are being confronted with playing catch-up now that economic realities have begun dominating concerns.

I think there are a number of groups that need to collaborate to create a solution. IT, HR, and the business units (the groups that own the processes being executed by the telecommuters) all have a role. However, only one of these groups is the lead and the decision maker. The rest have a service role (remember, collaboration does not mean there isn't a decision maker and business is not a democracy).

There is a simple 'gravity' test that I'll call 'responsibility litmus.' The group whose 'Responsibility' it is to get the work done, the group that directly suffers if the work isn't completed, is the group that should lead. They will determine criticality, scope and necessity. They are also usually the group with the funds make it happen.

Do you think this group is IT? Do you think it is HR? It might be possible to rationalize a 'pain scenario' for both IT and HR, but are these groups the ones who suffer most if the solution is incomplete or is at odds with the tasks to be completed?

The argument of which corporate functional organization should set the telecommuting strategy is the wrong question. Telecommuting is a relative new concept to many companies and each company needs to define when it would be appropriate to meet its individual business needs. Although HR may be the lead on the telecommuting strategy the concept should be vetted with business needs/demands in mind and with the direct input of the business leadership. For this to be successful for both the company and the employee, flexibility by both parties will be key, and not all roles and/or employees will be suited for telecommuting.

I agree with Mr. Brandon's viewpoint, that each department or functiuonal group within the organization manage their own costs and performance. However - as it roll upward into the core of the company, then it should be optimized as to recover as much money as possible. Things like space reductions, energy conservation and even emissions reductions all have high return values if collected together to repay some of the technology investments that have to happen.