How is smart working going in Italy? Here is who is abandoning it and why

Professor Mariano Corso, who is the scientific head of the Milan Polytechnic's Observatory, explains that this year "96% of large private companies have consolidated smart working initiatives within them: in this case, the number of remote workers has further increased by 1.6% compared to 2023, reaching 1.91 million, a figure that is close to the peak reached during the pandemic".

In reading this data, we must also consider that "this was the year of the regulatory evolution that sanctioned the end of the smart working obligation for fragile workers," Corso continues. "We see this effect especially in SMEs where smart working, rather than an organisational model, is still predominantly seen as an occasional work-life balance tool, perhaps more suffered than felt at an organisational and managerial level. This has led to models that are very forced, fake and more related to emergency legislation than to a change of pace in organisation'.

Result? Over the past year, initiatives in SMEs have decreased from 56% to 53% and are more widespread in medium-sized companies. The number of remote workers has also reduced, returning to just above the levels of 2022: in SMEs, smart workers have fallen from 570,000 in 2023 to 520,000 this year. In micro-enterprises, the figure is more stable, with a small increase from 620 thousand to 625 thousand smart workers.

In the public administration, where the issue is also being discussed in the renewal of the labour contract, agile work initiatives are now present in 61% of realities, according to the Polimi Observatory. Here too there is a greater incidence in the larger ones and it must be said that smart workers have fallen in the last year from 515 thousand to 500 thousand. "However, it must be considered that in the public sector alongside agile work there is, and has been in the recent past promoted and incentivised, the telework model. If we consider both work modes, the percentage of the public administration that offers forms of flexibility comes to 70 per cent,' Corso says.

The models defining remote working are in most cases standardised for all agile workers in the organisation. Only 24 per cent of public administrations and 40 per cent of large private enterprises have differentiated models according to the type of activity or the classification of persons. With regard to the number of days on which it is possible to work remotely, the numbers vary: in large companies, the average is 9 days per month, which means more than 2 days per week; in the public sector, it is 7, while in SMEs it is 6.6.

"The attitude of managers plays a crucial role in determining both the adoption of smart working practices and their actual use by workers," says Corso. "53% of large companies believe that their managers are promoters of such initiatives by putting them into practice, if possible, and also stimulating their employees to do so. In this case we can speak of a strategic approach, in which people have changed their way of working according to a logic by objectives'.

In the public sector and SMEs this positive attitude is less widespread: it is found in 35% and 27% of organisations respectively. More than a third of SMEs state that their managers have a sceptical attitude towards smart working, allowing people to work remotely only when there are particular needs, such as those of a personal nature, or even not incentivising its application, with an approach that could be described as impromptu, to be used when there are certain requirements. Finally, there is a tactical approach, with systematic use of remote working, but without any real transformation having taken place.

In all cases there is an evolution of models that should be seen in a somewhat broader context, such as that of our labour market where we are witnessing a real crisis in the labour supply, due to the demographic winter: in 2030 Adapt estimates that there will be 730 thousand fewer workers, in 2040 3.1 million, in 2050 4.6 million. This is why it becomes important 'to put in place all the tools capable of making work attractive and inclusive, for women, mothers, fathers, caregivers, for a very long phase since the sustainability of the social security system will lengthen everyone's working life,' Corso interprets. 'This will increasingly mean thinking about organisational models with a clear vision of how to promote productivity and motivation of people, work life balance, flexibility, inclusion, well-being at work. Rather than going back to models of the past, which are often outdated, we need to think about how to evolve, also thanks to technology, those we have because economic growth will only come about to the extent that we have more people working and producing'.

Since the pandemic peak to date, the number of smart workers has practically halved. Whereas in 2020 there were 6.590 million people working remotely, today the number is down to 3.555 million. This means that more than three million have returned to the office, mainly in the public sector and in small and medium-sized enterprises, while in large companies agile working models have gradually become consolidated. Also thanks to the choices made by some multinationals, such as Amazon, which have triggered a heated debate among workers, the question remains open as to what the future of this tool will be. The Observatory on Smart Working of the Milan Polytechnic surveyed a group of around 1,500 workers, employees of organisations with more than 10 employees, representative of the Italian salaried workforce.

Of these 198 work remotely part of the time. If they were asked to return fully present, according to the director of the Smart Working Observatory of the Politecnico di Milano, Fiorella Crespi, "73% would react negatively. In particular, 27% would question the fact of continuing to work for the organisation, considering or looking for another job, while 46% would work to have the decision considered disadvantageous changed". Questioning however does not mean leaving, it could also mean simply quiet quitting, i.e. doing the bare minimum. For workers, "however, in order to try to compensate at least partially for not being able to work remotely, the organisation should offer them greater hourly flexibility or an increase in pay of 20% on average," says Crespi.

Also included in the survey were 321 workers who have now completely returned to presence after having worked remotely in the past. They were asked about the reasons that led them to return to presence. It turned out that only 19% did so because of a personal choice, to socialise with colleagues or because they no longer needed to, while 23% said they had a new task that they could not perform remotely. The majority, 58%, state that it was a decision made by the organisation. Among the reasons, the employees' perception is that the task must be performed in the presence (46%) or the fear of a reduction in the level of service by working remotely (43%).

The results of the survey are set in an international context where there are companies that have rebalanced hybrid work, as has also happened in Italy, trying to refine the models and make them more functional to organisations and their characteristics, and other companies that have taken a complete backward step or launched negative signals. A little over a month has passed since Amazon's CEO Andy Jassy, wrote to the multinational company's employees explaining that the advantages of face-to-face work, especially for creativity, were greater than those of remote work. So? From the beginning of next year, it is back to working in the office, as in the past, five days out of five.

According to an internal survey, 90 per cent of people agree with the new policy. During an internal meeting in recent days, an Amazon top manager explained that those who do not agree with the choice can also find another company to work for. End of smart working? For now, yes, for Amazon, whose choice was preceded by signs of a rebalancing between face-to-face and remote work, once the pandemic is over, by other companies, such as Sap, At&t, Disney, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America. American tech companies were among the first to wholeheartedly embrace more flexible working arrangements during the pandemic peak, explaining that they had found successful ways to enable their workers to work remotely. Four years later, some changed their minds and sought a new balance.

If we want to look closer to us, to Europe and to an example of another big company, Deutsche bank, at the beginning of the year decided to rebalance its policy by reducing remote days from 60 to 40 per cent. In Germany, the German trade union protested at first, but the agitation did not get much traction. In the last few days, the French video game multinational, Ubisoft, has embarked on a path to rebalance telework and make everyone work on site three days a week and the other days remotely. The French trade union's response was a 3-day strike that also involved Italy. Smart working is a popular organisational model, now experienced as a kind of benefit. Every squeeze, economic conditions being equal, is not easy to metabolise. As also happened in the Panini company (figurines), where the mere announcement of a reduction in smart working days was followed by protests and protests.