logo
Hybrid work model best for productivity, says Australian government report on working from home

Hybrid work model best for productivity, says Australian government report on working from home

Daily Mail​29-05-2025

A landmark government report has revealed working from home is actually more productive than coming into the office - in moderation.
WFH really took over during the pandemic with more than a third of Australians now doing their job at home.
With managers trying to get staff back into the office more often, the Productivity Commission has concluded work from home arrangements are in fact more productive, as staff are spared the long commutes.
'Allowing workers to work from home some days can improve worker satisfaction and allows people to benefit by avoiding the commute to work, meaning they have additional time for other purposes,' it said.
Working from home has proven particularly popular with women, who are more likely to be the primary carers of children, making them the key beneficiaries of flexible arrangements.
A hybrid model, mixing work from home and the office, was seen as the best approach to encourage creative interactions.
'Workers do not need to be in the office full-time to experience the benefits of in-person interactions,' it said.
'As a result, hybrid work (working some days remotely and some days in the office) tends to be beneficial to productivity, or at least, is not detrimental to productivity.'
The Productivity Commission, however, said in-person interactions were more likely to spark initial breakthroughs.
'A key reason for this is that in-person interactions may be better for collaborative tasks and idea generation,' it said.
'Experimental evidence from engineering firms indicates that idea generation benefits from in-person interactions but in-person and virtual teams were equally effective in evaluating and selecting ideas that have already been developed.'
The report cited the case of IT firm, during the pandemic, spending more time on meetings 'which reduced the time available for work tasks; meaning hours worked increased while output declined'.
'The evidence on working from home is still evolving. However, given most studies find hybrid work to be either neutral or positive for labour productivity, there is no evidence to suggest that the trend towards hybrid working has contributed to the productivity loss phase of the productivity bubble,' the commission said.
But it warned that less experienced workers may struggle with work from home.
'For less experienced workers, in-person interactions may be an important avenue for skill development as there may be a greater knowledge transfer from senior workers and junior workers through informal in-person interactions,' it said.
Working from home has become a divisive topic with the Commonwealth Bank and ANZ requiring staff to spend 50 per cent of the time in the office, while Woolworths wants staff to return to the office three days a week.
Former Liberal leader Peter Dutton lost the last election, and his own seat, after dumping an election policy plan to force Canberra-based public servants back into the office, as other public servants working from home across Australia feared they would be next.
The policy was so disastrous politically that Jane Hume, who devised that unpopular WFH plan, was dumped as the Opposition's finance spokeswoman in new Liberal leader Sussan Ley's reshuffle.
Before the pandemic in March 2020, just 12 per cent of Australians reported working from home on all or most days of the week.
The proportion of Australians working everyday from home more than doubled to 31 per cent by September 2020, when Sydney and Melbourne were in lockdown.
After those lockdowns, 27 per cent worked from home at least some of the time during the week, indicating increased popularity of more hybrid work arrangement.
By August 2024, 36 per cent of those with a job reported that they usually worked from home.
'As working from home is a fundamental change to how people do their jobs, it is likely to have implications for labour productivity,' the report said.
Australia is in a productivity crisis, where output for every worker declined by 1.2 per cent in 2024.
The culprit, however, wasn't work-from-arrangements but a lack of new investment in technology that would make workers more productive.
'Capital matters for productivity because more capital (the machines, equipment and other durable goods that are used as inputs in production) means workers can produce more goods and services,' it said.
During the 1990s to the mid-2000s, productivity in Australia grew at an annual pace of more than two per cent as the introduction of the internet enabled companies to more efficiently share data.
Economists are hoping artificial intelligence could revive Australia's faltering productivity - regardless of whether staff are based at home or in the office.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

ChatGPT Plus vs. Copilot Pro: The Essential AI Decision Guide for 2025
ChatGPT Plus vs. Copilot Pro: The Essential AI Decision Guide for 2025

Geeky Gadgets

timean hour ago

  • Geeky Gadgets

ChatGPT Plus vs. Copilot Pro: The Essential AI Decision Guide for 2025

Choosing between ChatGPT Plus and Copilot Pro requires a clear understanding of their unique capabilities and intended use cases. Both tools use advanced artificial intelligence to enhance productivity, but they cater to distinct audiences and purposes. The video below from Simple Alpaca provides an in-depth comparison of their features, strengths, and ideal applications to help you make an informed decision. Watch this video on YouTube. ChatGPT Plus: A Versatile Conversational AI ChatGPT Plus, the premium offering from OpenAI, is designed to elevate conversational AI to new levels of performance. Its core strength lies in its advanced natural language processing (NLP) capabilities, allowing it to generate human-like text with remarkable fluency and coherence. Whether you're brainstorming ideas, drafting content, or seeking answers to complex questions, ChatGPT Plus delivers responses that are both contextually relevant and easy to understand. For professionals aiming to streamline their workflows, ChatGPT Plus offers several advantages over the free version, including faster response times and improved reliability. It is particularly effective for tasks such as: Drafting emails or documents: Save time by generating polished, professional text quickly. Save time by generating polished, professional text quickly. Generating creative content ideas: Explore innovative concepts for projects, articles, or campaigns. Explore innovative concepts for projects, articles, or campaigns. Exploring technical or non-technical topics: Engage in conversational interactions to deepen your understanding of various subjects. While ChatGPT Plus is not specifically designed for programming, it can process and explain technical concepts effectively, making it a flexible tool for users across diverse industries. Its versatility ensures it can adapt to a wide range of professional and personal applications. Copilot Pro: AI-Powered Coding Assistance Copilot Pro, developed by GitHub in collaboration with OpenAI, is a specialized tool tailored for software developers. Its primary focus is on providing intelligent coding assistance, offering features that streamline the development process. By analyzing the context of your codebase, Copilot Pro can: Suggest relevant code snippets: Quickly generate code suggestions that align with your project requirements. Quickly generate code suggestions that align with your project requirements. Automate repetitive coding tasks: Reduce time spent on routine tasks, such as writing boilerplate code. Reduce time spent on routine tasks, such as writing boilerplate code. Help identify and resolve errors: Enhance debugging efficiency by offering insights and solutions. One of Copilot Pro's standout features is its seamless integration with popular development environments like Visual Studio Code. This ensures developers can incorporate it into their workflows without disruption. Whether you're writing new code or maintaining legacy systems, Copilot Pro enhances productivity by allowing you to focus on solving complex challenges rather than getting bogged down by repetitive tasks. Key Factors to Consider When deciding between ChatGPT Plus and Copilot Pro, it's essential to evaluate your specific needs and priorities. Consider the following factors: Target Audience: ChatGPT Plus is ideal for individuals seeking a versatile conversational AI for general tasks, while Copilot Pro is specifically designed for developers working on software projects. ChatGPT Plus is ideal for individuals seeking a versatile conversational AI for general tasks, while Copilot Pro is specifically designed for developers working on software projects. Primary Use Cases: ChatGPT Plus excels in natural language processing, making it suitable for creative writing, brainstorming, and knowledge exploration. Copilot Pro focuses on coding assistance, offering tools for code generation and debugging. ChatGPT Plus excels in natural language processing, making it suitable for creative writing, brainstorming, and knowledge exploration. Copilot Pro focuses on coding assistance, offering tools for code generation and debugging. Workflow Integration: Copilot Pro integrates directly into development environments, streamlining the coding process. ChatGPT Plus operates as a standalone conversational tool, offering flexibility across various tasks. Copilot Pro integrates directly into development environments, streamlining the coding process. ChatGPT Plus operates as a standalone conversational tool, offering flexibility across various tasks. Pricing and Value: Both tools require a subscription, but their value depends on your specific needs. Developers may find Copilot Pro indispensable for its coding features, while ChatGPT Plus appeals to users seeking a broader range of applications. By carefully assessing these factors, you can determine which tool aligns best with your professional or personal objectives. Which Tool Is Right for You? The choice between ChatGPT Plus and Copilot Pro ultimately depends on your goals and the nature of your work. If your focus is on creative tasks, brainstorming, or exploring ideas, ChatGPT Plus offers a robust conversational AI experience. Its versatility makes it a valuable asset for professionals in fields such as content creation, education, and customer support. Conversely, if you are a developer or work extensively with code, Copilot Pro is likely the better fit. Its ability to generate code, debug errors, and integrate seamlessly with development tools can significantly enhance your productivity and simplify your workflow. By automating repetitive tasks and providing intelligent suggestions, Copilot Pro allows you to concentrate on solving complex programming challenges. Both tools represent significant advancements in AI technology, but their strengths cater to different needs. By evaluating your specific requirements—whether they involve natural language processing or programming support—you can choose the tool that best enables you to achieve your goals efficiently and effectively. Below are more guides on ChatGPT Plus from our extensive range of articles. Source & Image Credit: Simple Alpaca Filed Under: AI, Guides Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.

Erin Patterson makes new claims about fatal beef Wellington lunch - as she accuses the lone survivor of lying
Erin Patterson makes new claims about fatal beef Wellington lunch - as she accuses the lone survivor of lying

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Erin Patterson makes new claims about fatal beef Wellington lunch - as she accuses the lone survivor of lying

Accused killer Erin Patterson has refuted claims she told her lunch guests at an ill-fated lunch that she had been diagnosed with cancer. Entering the witness box for a second day on Thursday, Patterson further claimed she had never asked her guests over on the pretext of discussing with them a medical issue. The 50-year-old has pleaded not guilty to the murders of Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson. They died after consuming death cap mushrooms served in beef Wellingtons during lunch at her Leongatha home on July 29, 2023. In opening the trial in the Supreme Court of Victoria, sitting in the Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court in Victoria's east, Patterson's barrister Colin Mandy, SC told the jury on day one there was no dispute with the prosecution about how and why the guests came be at the lunch. 'It is not in dispute that Erin Patterson invited the guests over for lunch to her house in Leongatha. It is not in dispute that she invited her husband, Simon, over as well because she said she wanted to discuss a health issue that she was concerned about,' he said then. 'That is not in issue. The fact that she's never been diagnosed with cancer is not in issue.' But on Thursday, Patterson told the court she had never mentioned anything to her in-laws about a medical issue to entice them to accept her lunch invite. The jury heard previously evidence from child protection worker Katrina Cripps who claimed on August 1, 2023 at the Monash Medical Centre Patterson told her she had invited her guests over to discuss a medical issue. 'I wouldn't have put it like that because that wasn't the reason I invited people,' Patterson told prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers under cross examination. 'Ms Cripps is wrong, is she?' Dr Rogers asked. 'Yes,' Patterson responded. 'You deny that?' Dr Rogers continued. 'I didn't say that to her. I told her I had invited Don and Gail and Ian and Heather to lunch and I did confirm we had discussed some medical issues, but I did not tell her that was the reason for the lunch or the reason for the invitation, because it was not,' Patterson said. The jury had heard evidence in the opening days of the trial from Pastor Ian Wilkinson, who was the only person to survive the deadly lunch. Mr Wilkinson claimed Patterson told lunch guests she had undertaken a diagnostic test that showed a spot on the scan that was a tumour. 'I remember him saying that in his evidence, but I don't believe I said that,' Patterson said. 'Might you have said it?' Dr Rogers asked. 'I don't think so, no,' Patterson said. Slowly dying at Korumburra Hospital after the lunch, the court heard Don Patterson also claimed Patterson mentioned she had been diagnosed with ovarian cancer. The court heard Don had told Simon: 'Mum doesn't want me to tell you this. It's about what Erin talked to us about at the lunch.' 'Donald asked if Simon thought he should tell him and Simon said 'yes'. Donald then said, 'Erin told us that she had tests for a medical term relating to something on her elbow 'and that they'd found ovarian cancer. She will probably need chemo and some surgery and she wasn't sure how to tell the kids',' Dr Rogers said at the trial's opening. Patterson told the jury she denied telling her lunch guests she had been diagnosed with cancer. 'I don't think I put it that precisely, no,' she said. 'Well, how did you put it?' Dr Rogers asked. 'I don't remember saying I'd had a diagnosis,' she responded. In what became nothing short of a heated exchange, Dr Rogers bombarded Patterson with questions suggesting she told repeated lies about the deadly lunch. 'You told this lie, I suggest, as part of your efforts to get the lunch guests, and Simon, to attend your lunch; correct or incorrect?' Dr Rogers asked. 'Incorrect,' came the response. 'I suggest that you never thought you would have to account for this lie about having cancer because you thought that the lunch guests would die?' Dr Rogers said. 'That's not true.' 'And your lie would never be found out; correct or incorrect?' 'That's not true,' Patterson insisted. The trial before Justice Christoper Beale continues. . I

Trading platform CMC Markets misses profit expectations, shares drop 18%
Trading platform CMC Markets misses profit expectations, shares drop 18%

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Trading platform CMC Markets misses profit expectations, shares drop 18%

June 5 (Reuters) - British trading platform CMC Markets' (CMCX.L), opens new tab shares plunged nearly 18% after it reported annual pre-tax profit below market expectations on Thursday, hurt by higher-than-expected costs due to a one-time charge related to a regulatory review in Australia. Adjusted pre-tax profit rose 33% to 84.5 million pounds ($114.64 million) for the year ended March 31, missing analysts' estimate of 90.6 million pounds, according to a company-compiled consensus. CMC Markets said it took a one-time charge of 4.3 million pounds related to customer remediation in Australia, following an industry-wide regulatory review into margin netting - a form of risk management technique. Shares fell as much as 17.8% to 233.5p, their lowest in more than six weeks. CMC Markets, which provides trading services in more than 12,000 financial instruments, said deputy CEO David Fineberg will move into a newly created role of global head of strategic partnerships. It also named Paul Wainscott, a current senior independent director, as its new non-executive chairman. ($1 = 0.7371 pounds)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store