The Italians and the “Smart Working” trap

In recent years, Italians have unwittingly embraced a curious linguistic phenomenon: the adoption of “fake English” words. These are words that sound like English but either don’t exist in the English-speaking world or take on a meaning in Italian that’s quite different from their English counterpart. A recent Financial Times article explored this quirky trend, highlighting how words like “lifting” (used to describe a facelift) and “hotspot” (a reception centre for irregular migrants) have infiltrated the Italian vocabulary.

But perhaps no term has captured the Italian imagination—and created as much confusion—as “smart working.” On the surface, this expression seems like a straightforward borrowing from the English lexicon, yet, ironically, it doesn’t exist in the global business vernacular (at a quick Google search it has been occasionally mentioned in English, here’s an example—but it’s still written by an Italian professor). What Italians call “smart working” would be better described in English as remote work, though even this translation misses the cultural and managerial subtleties that have transformed Italy’s relationship with the concept of work since the pandemic.

The illusion of “smart working”

In Italy, smart working was originally introduced as a legal framework in 2017. Its goal was to give employees more flexibility in where and when they worked, aligning Italy with global trends in labour reform. However, the COVID pandemic forced its widespread adoption almost overnight. Italians, many of whom had never worked remotely before, suddenly found themselves grappling with this new reality. “Smart working” quickly became shorthand for the mass exodus from offices and the shift to home-based work setups, in a way that fundamentally altered the country’s approach to labour.

But here lies the catch: nowhere else in the world is “smart working” used as a term for remote work. In fact, the phrase in Italy encapsulates two distinct concepts that Italians seem to have merged—working remotely and towards business objectives. These are fundamentally distinct ideas, which do work well together, but in the Italian context, they have been squashed into one unified framework, which has resulted in an obnoxious gatekeeping on how people are doing remote—the separation between doing “real smart working” and “just remote working” is a rather contentious topic in the Italian-speaking LinkedIn, with the connotation that while the former is the real deal, the latter is its much more basic, less sophisticated sibling.

To add another layer of complexity, the Italians have adopted the term “lavoro agile” (literally, agile work) as a synonym for smart working. Internationally, business agility as rapid, continuous, and systematic evolutionary adaptation and entrepreneurial innovation directed at gaining and maintaining competitive advantage (as defined in an AWS blog) is a known concept, but the word agile is more often tied to a specific set of principles and values used in software development and project management—the Agile methodology, as it was laid out in the Agile Manifesto. In this methodology, small, cross-functional teams collaborate to produce fast, iterative progress. Neither business agility nor the Agile methodology have anything to do with the Italian interpretation of “smart working.” This linguistic confusion comes only with the risk of deepening misunderstandings, leading many to conflate flexibility with agility and agility with remote work, without grasping the broader implications of any of those ideas.

An assist to the Italian managerial class

At its core, “smart working” as a unified theory poses a risk—because it’s too much all at once, it’s easier to resist for the country’s managerial class. The Italian business fabric is dominated by small and medium-sized enterprises, many of which are family-owned businesses passed down through generations. The business culture in Italy is fairly traditional, hierarchical, and often averse to innovation. Decisions are typically made by seniority, but seniority in Italy is largely determined by your year of birth—rather than expertise or leadership potential. In many cases, leadership roles are filled by older generations who may lack the skills required to manage a modern workforce accustomed to technology and remote collaboration.

It’s no surprise, then, that the concept of “smart working” in Italy isn’t gaining much traction among Italian managers. Combining the expectations of remote work with the idea of working towards objectives—a system that demands trust, accountability, and a level of managerial oversight many leaders aren’t equipped to provide—is fair, as it’s fair to say that most of us who were working remotely way before it was mandated in 2020 agree that working towards objectives is the right way, but for a country that was always mostly about how many hours you were at your workstation, the “smart working” framework becomes a cumbersome beast.

Suddenly, as a business, you’re expected to do remote and shift from counting hours to tracking performance and objectives (with the former that has its own set of problems to solve, and the latter that should have been done a long time ago regardless) at the same time. Suddenly, if you’re a manager, you’re asked to become a Smart manager. The result? In many cases, throwing the baby away with the dirty water—Italy was among the worst performers in 2023 on having employed people working from home (no statistics about working from home and towards objective are available, of course) in the entire EU (source). The other side of the coin, the proliferation of “smart working consultants”, of which a significant number—as a non gambler I’d be ready to bet fairly heavy on this—had never experienced remote work before the pandemic.

Indeed, many Italian managers see “smart working” as a challenge to the very foundations of their authority. They are accustomed to having their workforce physically present, a preference that stems from an outdated mindset equating control with visibility and performance with how much time was spent at work. This mentality makes it difficult to embrace the freedom and trust inherent in an effective remote work setup. For them, “smart working” is too risky—it’s easier to abandon the concept entirely than to grapple with the managerial complexities it brings.

What’s worse is that many Italians only became familiar with remote work in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. With this abrupt transition, their understanding of the potential of remote work was limited by the emergency conditions under which it was implemented. Remote work became synonymous with hastily improvised setups, poor infrastructure, and an overwhelming sense of isolation. This distorted view of remote work has only made it easier for Italian managers to reject it.

The managerial blind spot

The Italian managerial class, especially in family-owned businesses, tends to prioritise loyalty and longevity over meritocracy. Employees are rewarded for their time served rather than for their vision or innovation. In this environment, remote work—and by extension, “smart working”—is seen as a threat to established structures. The focus shifts from developing talent and creativity to preserving a rigid hierarchy. Managers who lack the skills to oversee a remote team end up reinforcing a traditionalist view: if I can’t see you, I can’t manage you.

This blind spot is exacerbated by Italy’s regulatory landscape. While the legal framework for “smart working” exists, there seems to be no real incentive for businesses to modernise their managerial practices. The burden of innovation falls on the shoulders of workers, who are left navigating a system that offers them flexibility on paper but little in the way of genuine autonomy. Instead of a transformative approach to work, Italians are left with a half-baked system that traps them in a liminal space between the old and the new.

The missed opportunity

Italy’s slow adoption of remote work represents a missed opportunity for a country that could benefit immensely from embracing modern work practices. Italy has a good tech scene, a vibrant startup ecosystem, and a workforce that is eager to adapt to the demands of a globalised economy. Yet, the country remains held back by its reluctance to evolve beyond traditional hierarchies and outdated managerial models.

What could have been a revolution in the way Italians work has instead become a cautionary tale. The phrase “smart working” may sound futuristic, but in practice, is becoming a reason for resisting change. It’s a reminder that language matters—not just in how we describe the world, but in how we shape it. Italy’s adoption of “fake English” words like smart working reflects a deeper reluctance to confront the realities of a modern workforce and the managerial challenges that come with it.

As Italy moves into the future, it will need to rethink not just its terminology, but its entire approach to work. Otherwise, the hesitation around “smart working” will continue to hold back a country that could, in fact, be working smarter.