ブログの更新がしばらく空いてしまいました。
2016年9月28日に無事にModule 5が終わり、１週間ほど夏休みを取っていました。
大学院だけじゃなくて、仕事もこの週に合わせて休みをいただいたので、本当にリラックスできました。
Module 5では、公衆衛生の向上を目指して行われるプログラムをどう評価するか、ということを習いました。
Moduleの中で、「自社のリモートのワーク」をテーマにしてエッセイを書いてみました。500 wordsの制限の中で書いてあるので、尻切れトンボではありますが、シェアしたいと思います。
ちゃお！
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
The Program Evaluation of The Remote Working System in ICT Company
Information Communication Technology (ICT) changes our lifestyles drastically. It gets standard that every businessperson carries their own personal computer to work, and that we carry smartphones that are connected to the Internet as always. As I work at an ICT company and have a project management role for developing a product about data, I do not need to work in our office once we decide what to do. Because of the background of elaborating the Internet environment and the characteristic of my work, our company has a system that allows employees to take remote working days until twice a month. Although many employees think that the days should not be limited, some management people do not accept the system constructively. Therefore, I discuss the program evaluation of the present remote working system in my company to judge whether the days should be limited or not.
To assess the program, I recommend to inviting external evaluators than to assign internal evaluators. I describe the program before deciding which is better external or internal assessment. Employees use the days of remote working for receiving packages at home, letting them work alone in a quiet environment, brainstorming some ideas in a refreshed area, or working at home when a typhoon comes and transportations stop. There are four categories of employees when I discuss the remote: top management, middle management, team leaders, and members. Although top management and members think that employees should have choices of how to work, middle management and team leaders often consider that face-to-face communication would be essential to drive their tasks and to manage their teams. Because of the difference of opinion, the days of remote working are limited until twice a month.
There are six steps to design the evaluation that should be taken in a public health field: Engage stakeholders, Describe the program, Focus the evaluation design, Gather credible evidence, Justify conclusions, and Ensure use and share lessons learned (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). As I describe the stakeholders and the program, I focus on how to collect evidence and get conclusions. According to each stakeholder’s opinion, there is a split about managing teams on the remote working. Therefore, I recommend that external evaluators take a questionnaire to all employees and interviews to each level of employees. It could assess the objective situation and conclude the outcome and the essence of the split. There is another reason why I suggest the external survey. When the company takes an investigation as an internal one, the human resource department always takes an initiative. However, about the program, as the objects are all of the employees including the human resource department, the external evaluation could exclude the subjectivity and judge with credible information that would be gathered as primary sources.
In conclusion, the company that I work has the remote working system, but the stakeholders are divided on how to manage teams, and it limits the remote working days until twice a month. To assess the remote working system, the external evaluators should take a survey because there is always a contradiction that the objects of the system evaluate the system.
References
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n.d.) A framework for program evaluation [Online]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework/index.htm
