Last month consulting firm McKinsey & Company released their newest edition of their American Opportunity Survey on remote work. There are many statistics from the survey, but the bottom line is that the flexible work arrangements companies put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic are here to stay.
“After more than two years of observing remote work and predicting that flexible working would endure after the acute phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, we view these data as a confirmation that there has been a major shift in the working world and in society itself,” the report states.
The survey is a joint effort between McKinsey & Company and market-research firm Ipsos. Around 25,000 Americans 18 and older completed the survey and the report shares the number of people working remotely, how many days per week they have flexible arrangements, the gender, ethnicity, and education level of those wanting to work remotely, and more. Another important fact is that respondents come from many different careers, not only with “white collar” jobs.
The first interesting result was that 58% (the equivalent of 92 million people) have the opportunity to work remotely at least one day a week. 35% have the option to work remotely up to 5 days a week. 42% had no opportunity to work from home.
Another striking result from the survey is that when offered, almost every employee would take the opportunity to work remotely. 87% of employees offered at least some remote work embraced the opportunity and spent an average of 3 days per week working from home.
The report stated that flexible work arrangements vary by occupation, age, gender, and income level. Young, educated people with high incomes had the most remote work possibilities. Men (61%) did better than women (52%). 47% of those with incomes between $25,000 and $49,000 had remote opportunities. 75% of those with incomes over $150,000 had remote work opportunities.
Because the survey was conducted online, McKinsey admits the results could be biased against people with lower incomes, less education, and people living in rural areas, as these groups tend to be underrepresented on the internet. The firm attempted to overcome any possible bias with weighted models.
“After more than two years of observing remote work and predicting that flexible working would endure after the acute phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, we view these data as a confirmation that there has been a major shift in the working world and in society itself,” the report states.
The survey is a joint effort between McKinsey & Company and market-research firm Ipsos. Around 25,000 Americans 18 and older completed the survey and the report shares the number of people working remotely, how many days per week they have flexible arrangements, the gender, ethnicity, and education level of those wanting to work remotely, and more. Another important fact is that respondents come from many different careers, not only with “white collar” jobs.
The first interesting result was that 58% (the equivalent of 92 million people) have the opportunity to work remotely at least one day a week. 35% have the option to work remotely up to 5 days a week. 42% had no opportunity to work from home.
Another striking result from the survey is that when offered, almost every employee would take the opportunity to work remotely. 87% of employees offered at least some remote work embraced the opportunity and spent an average of 3 days per week working from home.
The report stated that flexible work arrangements vary by occupation, age, gender, and income level. Young, educated people with high incomes had the most remote work possibilities. Men (61%) did better than women (52%). 47% of those with incomes between $25,000 and $49,000 had remote opportunities. 75% of those with incomes over $150,000 had remote work opportunities.
Because the survey was conducted online, McKinsey admits the results could be biased against people with lower incomes, less education, and people living in rural areas, as these groups tend to be underrepresented on the internet. The firm attempted to overcome any possible bias with weighted models.
RSS Feed
