I found two recent news articles on the homesourcing trend. One, from a Pennsylvania paper called the Times Leader follows a rural Minnesota woman who was tired of commuting 40 miles to work.

(it contains a gross geographical error -- she couldn't have commuted 40 miles to Grand Rapids, Michigan, which is at least 400, not 40 miles from any given point in Minnesota. The article meant Grand Rapids, Minnesota, birthplace of Judy Garland.)

So 25 year old Kathleen Hughes got a job as an agent in a virtual call center, becoming "part of a growing legion of so-called cyberagents, the ranks of which are expected to grow at a clip of more than 20 percent annually as companies continue to move work away from traditional brick-and-mortar call centers to lower-cost centers that tap into workers’ homes."

The article quoted statistics from IDC, a research and consulting firm: America's 112,000 home-based agents will triple in numbers by 2010.

In some ways, this trend isn't so good for the worker. The agent seldom gets benefits. Some employers insist agents train off the clock and some charge for training. Agents are often independent contractors, meaning they must have their own computer, phone line, and internet service.

The other article comes from the Salt Lake Tribune. It profiles a company called O'Currance Teleservices, a Salt Lake City outsourcer.

David Meine, an EVP at O'Currance, said that productivity seemed to go up 15% when agents worked from home. Agents must work at O'Currance's call centers for a few months before they can work from home.

Do you have any opinions about homesourcing? Do you work from home? Do you supervise or train home-based agents? Tell us about it.