IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/25-36.html

Tapping Business and Household Surveys to Sharpen Our View of Work from Home

Author

Listed:
  • José María Barrero
  • Nicholas Bloom
  • Kathryn Bonney
  • Cory Breaux
  • Catherine Buffington
  • Steven J. Davis
  • Lucia Foster
  • Brian McKenzie
  • Keith Savage
  • Cristina Tello-Trillo

Abstract

Timely business-level measures of work from home (WFH) are scarce for the U.S. economy. We review prior survey-based efforts to quantify the incidence and character of WFH and describe new questions that we developed and fielded for the Business Trends and Outlook Survey (BTOS). Drawing on more than 150,000 firm-level responses to the BTOS, we obtain four main findings. First, nearly a third of businesses have employees who work from home, with tremendous variation across sectors. The share of businesses with WFH employees is nearly ten times larger in the Information sector than in Accommodation and Food Services. Second, employees work from home about 1 day per week, on average, and businesses expect similar WFH levels in five years. Third, feasibility aside, businesses’ largest concern with WFH relates to productivity. Seven percent of businesses find that onsite work is more productive, while two percent find that WFH is more productive. Fourth, there is a low level of tracking and monitoring of WFH activities, with 70% of firms reporting they do not track employee days in the office and 75% reporting they do not monitor employees when they work from home. These lessons serve as a starting point for enhancing WFH-related content in the American Community Survey and other household surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • José María Barrero & Nicholas Bloom & Kathryn Bonney & Cory Breaux & Catherine Buffington & Steven J. Davis & Lucia Foster & Brian McKenzie & Keith Savage & Cristina Tello-Trillo, 2025. "Tapping Business and Household Surveys to Sharpen Our View of Work from Home," Working Papers 25-36, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:25-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/library/working-papers/2025/adrm/ces/CES-WP-25-36.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pablo Zarate & Mathias Dolls & Steven J. Davis & Nicholas Bloom & Jose Maria Barrero & Cevat Giray Aksoy, 2024. "Why Does Working from Home Vary Across Countries and People?," NBER Working Papers 32374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2012. "Americans Do IT Better: US Multinationals and the Productivity Miracle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 167-201, February.
    3. Natalia Emanuel & Emma Harrington & Amanda Pallais, 2023. "The Power of Proximity to Coworkers," NBER Working Papers 31880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Lewandowski, Piotr & Lipowska, Katarzyna & Smoter, Mateusz, 2024. "Preference for working from home – subjective perceptions of COVID-19 matter more than objective information on occupational exposure to contagion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    5. Alexander Bick & Adam Blandin & Karel Mertens, 2023. "Work from Home before and after the COVID-19 Outbreak," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 1-39, October.
    6. Bloom, Nicholas & Davis, Steven J. & Hansen, Stephen & Lambert, Peter John & Sadun, Raffaella & Taska, Bledi, 2023. "Remote work across jobs, companies and space," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121302, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Barrero, Jose Maria & Bloom, Nick & Davis, Steven J., 2020. "Why Working From Home Will Stick," SocArXiv wfdbe, Center for Open Science.
    8. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "How to Run Surveys: A Guide to Creating Your Own Identifying Variation and Revealing the Invisible," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 205-234, September.
    9. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    10. Natalia Emanuel & Emma Harrington, 2024. "Working Remotely? Selection, Treatment, and the Market for Remote Work," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 528-559, October.
    11. Catherine Buffington & Lucia Foster & Colin Shevlin, 2023. "Measuring Business Trends and Outlook through a New Survey," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 113, pages 140-144, May.
    12. Nicholas Bloom & Ruobing Han & James Liang, 2024. "Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance," Nature, Nature, vol. 630(8018), pages 920-925, June.
    13. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    14. Andrew S. Green & Mark J. Kutzbach & Lars Vilhuber, 2017. "Two Perspectives on Commuting: A Comparison of Home to Work Flows Across Job-Linked Survey and Administrative Files," Working Papers 17-34, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    15. Morris A Davis & Andra C Ghent & Jesse Gregory, 2024. "The Work-From-Home Technology Boon and its Consequences," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(6), pages 3362-3401.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David R. Agrawal & Xinyu Chen, 2026. "State and Local Tax Policy in a Time of Telework," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(2), pages 465-505.
    2. Jan Bietenbeck & Natalie Irmert & Therese Nilsson, 2026. "Individualism and working from home," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 64(2), pages 491-507, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ketter, Laura & Morris, Todd & Yu, Lizi, 2025. "A New Equilibrium: COVID-19 Lockdowns and WFH Persistence," IZA Discussion Papers 17975, IZA Network @ LISER.
    2. Laura Ketter & Todd Morris & Lizi Yu, 2025. "A new equilibrium: COVID-19 lockdowns and WFH persistence," Papers 2506.16671, arXiv.org.
    3. Burdett, Ashley & Etheridge, Ben & Tang, Li & Wang, Yikai, 2024. "Worker productivity during Covid-19 and adaptation to working from home," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Sabrina Wulff Pabilonia & Victoria Vernon, 2025. "Remote work, wages, and hours worked in the United States," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 1-49, March.
    5. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2026. "Mismatch in Preferences for Working from Home: Evidence from Discrete Choice Experiments with Workers and Employers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 79(1), pages 142-172, January.
    6. Christos A. Makridis, 2025. "The Allocation of Time and Remote Work," CESifo Working Paper Series 12363, CESifo.
    7. Nicholas Bloom & Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth, 2024. "Work from Home and Disability Employment," NBER Working Papers 32943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Filippo Boeri & Riccardo Crescenzi & Davide Rigo, 2025. "Work from Home and Firm Productivity: The Role of ICT and Size," CESifo Working Paper Series 12253, CESifo.
    9. Nicholas Bloom & Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth, 2026. "Work from Home and Disability Employment," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 179-195, June.
    10. Pablo Zarate & Mathias Dolls & Steven J. Davis & Nicholas Bloom & Jose Maria Barrero & Cevat Giray Aksoy, 2024. "Why Does Working from Home Vary Across Countries and People?," NBER Working Papers 32374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Gaetano Basso & Davide Dottori & Sara Formai, 2025. "Working from home and labour productivity: firm-level evidence," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1508, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    12. Jan K. Brueckner & David R. Agrawal, 2025. "Work-from-Home and Wage Convergence Across Cities: An Exploration," CESifo Working Paper Series 12150, CESifo.
    13. Jan Bietenbeck & Natalie Irmert & Therese Nilsson, 2026. "Individualism and working from home," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 64(2), pages 491-507, April.
    14. F. Cerina & L. Deidda & S. Nobili, 2025. "Skill-biased remote work and incentives," Working Paper CRENoS 202505, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    15. Achard, Pascal & Belot, Michèle & Chevalier, Arnaud, 2025. "When Parents Work from Home," IZA Discussion Papers 17957, IZA Network @ LISER.
    16. Althoff, Lukas & Eckert, Fabian & Ganapati, Sharat & Walsh, Conor, 2022. "The Geography of Remote Work," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    17. Mert Akan & Jose Maria Barrero & Nicholas Bloom & Thomas Bowen & Shelby R. Buckman & Steven J. Davis & Hyoseul Kim, 2025. "The New Geography of Labor Markets," NBER Working Papers 33582, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Gilles Duranton & Jessie Handbury, 2023. "COVID and Cities, Thus Far," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 29(2), pages 6-52, October.
    19. Breda, Thomas & Dutronc-Postel, Paul & Pecheu, Vladimir, 2026. "Does feasibility explain the unequal development of working from home?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    20. Behrens, Kristian & Kichko, Sergei & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2024. "Working from home: Too much of a good thing?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • E24 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Employment; Unemployment; Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution; Aggregate Human Capital; Aggregate Labor Productivity
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • M54 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Labor Management

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:25-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.