What Bosses Really Think About Working From Home
From our editorial team: This article is from September 2021, when most countries were still emerging from the pandemic, but we’ve included it due to its insightful value regarding the major debate about remote versus in-person work that has erupted globally since the pandemic.
The following contribution comes from the BBC website and is authored by Maddy Savage, a features correspondent.
Many managers are eager for staff to return to the office, even though employees advocate for alternative work arrangements. Why? And how will this change the future of work?
Leaning over your desk to ask a colleague a quick question, spontaneously going for a walk to exchange ideas, and knowing that everyone is connected to a stable Wi-Fi network. These are just some of the reasons why 26-year-old James Rogers enjoys leading his team from the office, rather than from the kitchen table.
“As a company, we prioritize working in the office, and I personally believe we can be a stronger team when we work there full-time,” says Rogers, head of digital PR at the London branch of a British-American global content agency. The company began offering its employees the option to return to the office part-time in April. “Our goal is to have the majority of our team back in the office as often as possible over the next few months.”
Human resources experts note that Rogers’ attitude reflects a widespread trend.
Despite numerous global surveys indicating that remote work has been a positive experience for a significant portion of employees, and that many (though not all) want it to continue, many managers disagree.
Managers Prefer Their Employees to Be in the Office
In the United States, an impressive 72% of managers currently supervising remote workers would prefer all their subordinates to be in the office, according to recent research by the Society for Human Resource Management, which BBC Worklife accessed in July. A June survey of UK managers for the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) showed that roughly half expected staff to be in the office at least two or three days a week. In Sweden, Winningtemp, a company specializing in employee engagement management and serving clients in 25 countries, says it is already seeing signs of a return to the office, especially in markets with high vaccination rates. “I see many companies making it mandatory right now,” says founder and CEO Pierre Lindmark. “They’re starting to say, ‘Okay, you’ve had your second vaccination, you need to come back to the office.’”
All of this is fueling the debate about why bosses are abandoning remote work faster than many experts predicted, what implications this has for the future of remote work, and how it will affect employees who want to maintain their work routines from the pandemic.
Courtesy of James Rogers: “As a company, we prioritize the office a lot… I think we can be a stronger team when we work in the office full-time.”
As a company, we prioritize the office a lot… I think we can be a stronger team when we work in the office full-time.
Need for Control
While the rise of remote work during the Covid-19 pandemic showed that employees could be productive outside the office, HR experts point out that many managers experienced a loss of control compared to the pre-pandemic era. Reversing remote work policies and promoting a return-to-office mindset may be due, at least in part, to a desire to regain some control.
“If you meet with people, you feel like you have control,” says Lindmark. “People aren’t judged just by what they see on camera, but by their productivity, by what happens [in the office].”
Now that lockdowns have ended in many countries and vaccination rates are high, she says that bosses are making the more “emotional” decision to bring everyone back to the office.
However, she warns that this often happens without a thorough analysis of individual or company performance during the remote work phase, or without a strategy for how this will affect the employee experience.
“Managing a remote team is more difficult. It requires new skills. And many people were forced to adapt without being prepared,” adds Maya Middlemiss, a remote work author based in Valencia, Spain. “Therefore, it’s not surprising that we’re experiencing a backlash and that those who didn’t adapt well from a management perspective prefer everyone to return.”
Looking Important
Other observers have taken a less diplomatic approach. Business and media blogger Ed Zitron recently asserted that many middle managers are eager to regain some status. According to him, some simply miss the opportunity to look important as they flit from meeting to meeting, overseeing their teams’ activities. «While this can be done via Zoom and Slack, it becomes much clearer who actually did the work, as its origin can be digitally assessed,» he wrote in a June newsletter.
In the United States, a staggering 72% of managers currently supervising remote workers would prefer all their subordinates to be in the office.
Unsurprisingly, the managers themselves don’t share this view. However, bosses who champion in-office work, such as James Rodgers, do acknowledge that greater visibility of their subordinates is central to their position. «Not to micromanage and ‘mobster’ them, but to understand where they might need more support,» they argue. “It’s easier to discern if a team member is struggling with a task when they’re standing right in front of you. You simply don’t have that visibility when they’re 50 or 60 kilometers away, in their own home.”
In addition to visibility, managers who champion the shift to remote work also often highlight the social and creative opportunities that in-person work offers. For example, informal chats by the water cooler, face-to-face introductions for new employees, after-work team-building events, and spontaneous brainstorming sessions.
“During lockdowns, we did our best to be as creative and spontaneous as possible, but it’s quite difficult when you have to schedule a call for everything,” says Daniel Bailey, 34, CEO of a London-based footwear research company that will move to an office in the city’s new Design District in September. “Working remotely has huge advantages, but I don’t think it will ever surpass the experience of being together in the same place for the creative process,” he says.
Kerri Sibson, director of the company developing the new neighborhood, says other executives are prioritizing a return to the office so their staff can resume organizing and attending in-person networking events or connecting with other industry professionals in the same area. «Startups need to find growth opportunities that often arise from these chance encounters,» she argues.
Courtesy of Pierre Lindmark. Pierre Lindmark believes that managers’ desire for control is a key factor in the return to the office (Credit: Courtesy of Pierre Lindmark).
Out of sight, out of mind?
Whatever managers’ motivations for abandoning remote work, expressing a clear preference for on-site employees raises important questions about workforce equity, especially if some employees still work remotely or spend a greater proportion of their time at home than others.
Bosses who champion on-site work, like Rogers, often insist that companies can and should work to ensure that «equal experiences and opportunities exist for the team, whether they work in the office or not.» However, a recent survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) suggests that around two-thirds of remote staff managers believe that full-time remote work is detrimental to employees’ career goals. A similar proportion admits to considering remote employees more easily replaceable than those who work in the office. “The saying ‘out of sight, out of mind’ perfectly explains why this sentiment exists among human resources managers and demonstrates how deeply ingrained the idea of in-person work is in our culture,” argues Johnny C. Taylor, president and CEO of the organization.
The SHRM survey suggested that about two-thirds of remote human resources managers believe that full-time teleworking harms employees’ career goals.
Other research indicates that some managers still struggle to trust employees who work from home. The results of an online survey conducted in August of 200 U.S. executives suggested that they lacked full confidence that a third of their staff would properly utilize the collaborative technologies necessary for successful remote work. At the start of the pandemic, research for Harvard Business Review showed that 41% of managers were skeptical about remote workers’ ability to maintain long-term motivation.
Middlemiss warns that there is a «real risk» that these kinds of attitudes toward office-based employees will amplify pre-existing biases, such as those related to race, social class, disability, and gender. Even before COVID-19, women were more likely to request flexible work arrangements due to caregiving responsibilities, for example, Middlemiss says, and are therefore likely to be disproportionately affected if companies prioritize retaining or promoting office-based staff.
Talent Retention
On the other hand, employment experts predict that, despite some managers’ resistance to remote work, they may have to make it a permanent option as companies seek to retain and attract employees.
«The pandemic has shown that employees can work successfully from home and want to maintain this flexibility,» says Taylor. «Ultimately, benefits like remote work and flexible hours are critical for attracting and retaining top talent, and employers are aware of this.»
«If you can work remotely for one person, you can do it for anyone else, even for employers who aren’t in your area,» adds Middlemiss. «So, if you now know that this is how you want to live and work, it’s important to know that you could have many more opportunities available to you.»
PocketLaw: Olga Beck-Friis, co-founder of a Stockholm-based digital legal advice platform, says she plans to maintain the option of remote work (Credit: PocketLaw).
There is already compelling evidence of increased job turnover, as workers, in the wake of the pandemic, have a clearer vision of how they want their work and home routines to look in the future. In the United States, a new PwC survey suggests that nearly two-thirds of workers are looking for a new job, while figures from the British job portal Totaljobs indicate that more than three-quarters of Britons are actively seeking employment.
Executives who continue to promote remote work argue that their approach is already having a positive impact on recruitment. “We have received inquiries from developers in France, the UK, and Belgium. This is due to the flexibility we offer,” says Olga Beck-Friis, co-founder of a Stockholm-based digital legal advice platform. “We currently have no plans to adopt a full-time return-to-office policy.”
Meanwhile, Lindmark of Winningtemp argues that some managers who opt to return to the office full-time might reconsider their decision.
He explains that abandoning remote work could affect productivity levels and profitability if employees decide to keep their jobs but disagree with the company’s strategy.
“If people have been working remotely for a long time and really enjoy it, returning to the office makes them feel controlled… they’re losing autonomy.” Instead, he argues that managers should take a closer look at individual and team performance, as well as employee morale, to help create hybrid models that everyone is comfortable with.
“A flexible working program… should be beneficial for employees, employers, and organizations alike,” agrees Taylor of the Society for Human Resource Management. “There’s no one-size-fits-all solution. And that’s the key.”
In London, Rogers, an advocate for office work, is confident that other companies will adopt his perspective. “I think many companies that underestimate the power of having their staff together in one space might change their initial stance on remote work in the future,” he argues. “We found that most of our staff were enthusiastic about the idea of returning to work together in the office.”
Remote or In-Person Work? The Future Lies in a Better Hybrid Model
The following is a contribution from the Forbes website, authored by Norbert Monfort, an academic assistant in the Department of People and Organization Management at Esade.
The hybrid model shouldn’t be an option, but a competitive advantage.
Amazon, JPMorgan, and Starbucks have something in common. Over the past year, among other companies, they have asked their employees to return to the office four or five days a week, abandoning the hybrid or remote model and raising concerns that this trend will gradually become the norm in other companies and institutions.
The potential return to fully in-person work has sparked a very interesting debate. This shift is probably not so much a return to the past as a sign that companies are still searching for the right balance. The hybrid model isn’t perfect, but neither is the in-person model. What is worrying is the number of decisions being made without dialogue or consideration for the changes in life that remote work has made possible.
Why could a forced return to the office be counterproductive?
Returning to full in-person work would represent a real setback for the business world, both in terms of work-life balance and organizational productivity. According to the 5th Annual State of Remote Work Report, published by Owl Labs and Global Workplace Analytics, 90% of respondents who worked from home during the pandemic considered themselves as productive or more productive than when they worked in the office.
Focusing on people leads to higher performance.
Furthermore, a Gartner study shows that working in people-centric work environments increases the likelihood of high performance.
Today’s leaders must know how to lead today’s people. One of the most dangerous messages that an attempt to abandon the hybrid system could convey is: «We want to regain control,» as it implies that the organization does not trust its employees.
Some companies that promised permanent remote or hybrid work are reducing this modality or «forcing» their employees to return to the office five days a week. This has led to strikes, internal protests, resignations, and a sense of betrayal among employees, who had reorganized their lives based on these promises, resulting in a loss of loyalty.
This debate between in-person and hybrid work is strategic for managing a critical aspect of organizations: talent acquisition and retention.
Hybrid Work as a Strategic Advantage for Talent Retention
Without this talent, any organization becomes less efficient and, therefore, less productive in the long run. However, the illusion of managing by focusing solely on the present and immediate results can be dangerous for decision-making. A short-term approach to management makes us lose sight of the strategy.
The impact on talent acquisition and retention includes:
Competitive disadvantage: Companies that require full-time in-person work are at a disadvantage compared to those that offer hybrid or remote models. The reasons are clear from the perspective of work-life balance. This is complex to manage in all sectors, but it can be fatal in the technology sector, since this type of work can usually be easily done in a hybrid format.
Perceived rigidity: Candidates value organizational culture. If a company is perceived as inflexible or outdated, it loses appeal compared to others better adapted to today’s BANI (Fragile, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Incomprehensible) world.
Less geographical
