Telework - Telenor

46
Illustration 2 Why is boundary work necessary?
The remote worker’s competing roles of mother and employee cause a conflict in laying down boundaries between leisure and work
in the private sphere is preferable. The
homeworkers’ way of organising work
in the private sphere is their way to construct
boundaries between work and
leisure (Nippert-Eng, 1996 p. 7), and to
reach order at home.
The theory presented by Christena Nippert-Eng
can also be difficult to use. The
theory makes use of the concepts of segmentator
and integrator to show how
workers create boundaries between work
and leisure. The concepts are ideal types
and the homebased teleworkers mentioned
in this article are not either segmentators
or integrators, but both – as
shown in Figure 3 – by placing themselves
somewhere in the middle between
the two categories. The use of ideal types
makes it difficult to place the informants
in the study as either segmentators or
integrators. Nearly all of them are integrators
and segmentators – depending on
whether our focus is work time, work
place, routines or breaks. A use of other
concepts than segmentator and integrator,
and different criteria for being included
in the categories, could make the use of
the theory better.
How the homeworkers place themselves
between the two extreme positions of
segmentator or integrator on the continuum,
depends on how they organise
themselves at home, and on how they
understand the categories of work and
leisure. To create some kind of boundaries
between time and place is most
obvious – it is easiest to see which times
and what kinds of workroom belong to
work, and what belongs to leisure. Anyway,
it can be necessary to ask if the
homeworkers will become integrators by
working at home. It can be easier to be a
segmentator than a integrator. The integrators
are more flexible, and they handle
the situation in a better way. The integrators
also create boundaries that are subtler
and they can handle more disorder
than the segmentators. Increased focus
on boundary work, blurring boundaries
and the difficulties of being an integrator
in the research on homebased telework,
can imply increased consciousness
among homeworkers on boundary work
and being an integrator or a segmentator.
Some of the homeworkers in this empirical
study started teleworking and their
boundary work as integrators and have
ended up as segmentators. This implies
that it is important to study teleworkers
with experience as homeworkers to get
a view of how they do their boundary
work. In the end, I think it is important to
underline that it is the individual who
chooses whether integrating or segmentating
work and leisure is preferable.
8 Literature
Bakke, J W. 1997. The ergonomics of
teleworking. Telektronikk, 93 (3/4),
78–89.
Bakke, J W. 1995. Fjernarbeid – en
visjon i forandring. Kjeller, Telenor
R&D. (Telenor R&D Note; N61/95.)
Bakke, J W. 1994a. Arbeid på hjemmebane.
Kjeller, Norwegian Telecom Research.
(Televerkets forskningsinstitutt
Note; N40/94.)
Bakke, J W. 1994b. Teleworking on the
domestic scene. Lecture presented at
HOIT Home-Oriented Informatics,
Telematics & Automation, Copenhagen,
27 June – 1 July, 1994. Kjeller, Norwegian
Telecom Research. (Televerkets
forskningsinstitutt Lecture; F17/94.)
Bakke, J W. 1993a. Fjernarbeid som
organisasjonsform. Kjeller, Norwegian
Telecom Research. (Televerkets forskningsinstitutt
Lecture F 6/93.)
Douglas, M. 1994 (1996). Purity and
danger. An analysis of the concepts of
pollution and taboo. London, Routledge
& Kegan Paul Ltd.
Douglas, M. 1990. Symbolic pollution.
Culture and society. Contemporary
Telektronikk 4.1999