A few weeks ago, I wrote a blog post about the recent snow storms we had in Washington, D. C. and how many federal employees were able to continue working during the storms despite the fact that the government was shut down for an entire week. At the time, the head of the Office of Personnel Management and the Washington Post estimated that thirty percent of all employees were able to keep working despite being shut in at home. This compares to only about one percent of all federal workers who were able to work from home during the last blizzard we had in Washington in 1996.
In my post, I noted that a major reason for this change was not just the fact that we had more people connected to broadband and faster connections, but we also had KINDS of broadband, especially mobile high speed services. One employee was quoted as saying that while they had broadband at home, the power went out and he was still able to work due to the fact that he had a Blackberry and could recharge it in his car. Now THAT is a major difference from 1996. In fact, landline broadband was only barely beginning to be deployed at the time and mobile broadband was not even a consideration.
Today, the OPM executive provided even more proof of the importance of broadband to a House Committee. He noted that in the past, they calculated that a total shutdown of the Federal Government in the Washington, D. C. area would cost about $100 million in lost work time and productivity. Due to the large number of employees they estimated were in fact now teleworking (almost 30 percent of those who were not able to get to work), the actual estimated productivity losses were not $100 million according to OPM more like $70 million. That is still real money to be sure but it is even harder proof of the value of telework. OPM also acknowledged that these were rough numbers and it was very likely that the actual number of teleworking employees was far higher.
While this may have been an example of a strong need driving demand, I think it is also evidence of something else I believe happens a lot in the Internet ecosystem – the quiet but continuing evolution of technology, and consumer adoption and adaptation. Take for example this post I did some time ago. One of the key trends I pointed to was the long held belief (I first heard the idea in the 1970’s) that computers would lead to “paperless” offices. Many promoted the idea but over time more and more scoffed at it. By quietly, steadily, companies worked to improve their products, consumers adapted and frankly the consumer base changed as well (i.e., more young people in the work place who do not need to print out emails – they are screen readers first and foremost). Low and behold, we are now seeing the emergence of the paperless office and the figures – in terms of the amount of paper used – show it.
You can’t predict these things and often folks will confidently predict that this or that “will never happen” or “has failed”. If we allow the Internet innovation process to continue and don’t undermine it with bad policies, I think we will continue to be surprised, most of the time in a good way.