Previous studies have found that working from home (WFH) frequency and commute distance/residential location influence each other. However, less attention has been given to the link with commute duration and people’s ideal commute duration. People who have long commute durations and/or do not like to commute may be more inclined to work from home. In this study, we investigate how ideal and actual WFH frequency and ideal and actual commute duration influence each other and identify distinct worker segments based on these combined measures. The role of trip satisfaction, travel mode, residential location, commute frequency, and attitudes towards WFH and commute duration are used to explain different segments. Data from 2023 travel survey of University College London staff (n = 1791) were analyzed using multiple regression and cluster (segmentation) analyses. The average actual and ideal commute durations were about 58 and 34 min, respectively, while the average actual and ideal WFH shares were 41 % and 48 %. The segmentation results show that the staff can be grouped into five distinct clusters: tolerant long commuters (14.9 % of the sample), overburdened hybrid workers (14.8 %), balanced hybrid commuters (22.3 %), remote flex workers (25.2 %), and happy office commuters (22.7 %). The findings show that commute duration alone does not always determine how much people desire to WFH. Workers living in outer London areas and relying on rail are concentrated in the highest-burden clusters. People living in shorter distance, those who usually walk and cycle, are satisfied with their commute and have the least desire for WFH. Finally, policies that limit WFH may place a heavier burden on women and older workers who live farther away and rely on long rail commutes.
Mehdizadeh et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: