Hybrid work schedules have remained steady. Should we now change the conversation?
Just like back-to-school, the back-to-office conversation continues to return every fall, as company leaders continue to try to get people to spend more time in the office. And in just the last few weeks more stories have surfaced about increased resistance to the return to office in the U.S.
In June, Patagonia gave some 90 staff members just 3 days to decide whether they’ll relocate close to the office or quit. Gaming company Roblox told employees that they would have to find another job if they couldn’t make it into the company’s physical office in California. A tussle is also underway at Amazon: 30,000 employees signed a petition opposing the company’s in-office mandate, and as many as 1,800 said they would take a stand and walk out. Dell has said that remote workers are not eligible for promotions. Google CEO Eric Schmidt has claimed that remote work is “killing” the company.
Sometimes, those in-office rules come with double standards. Starbucks requires its corporate employees to work in the office three out of five days a week, yet its new CEO Brian Niccol will be working remotely full-time.
“Companies have to take seriously the management of return to work,” says Peter Capelli, a professor of management and Wharton’s director of the center for human resources at the University of Pennsylvania. “If they say it, then mean it for everyone. I think leadership doesn’t want to give it their attention, set an example, make the case as to ‘what we are doing and why.’”
In-Office Levels Unchanged
Despite the pushback, in-office levels have remained relatively unchanged over the past few quarters, hovering around 67% to 69% of firms offering work location flexibility, according to the most recent Flex Report, which collects data on office requirements across industries, geographies and company size. The average number of days that employees are expected to be in the office has also been relatively flat, oscillating between 2.4 days to 2.7 days around the past five to six quarters.
Experts say that at this point, four years in, if leaders have clearly communicated expectations for the office and they are still not getting them met, then it might be a red flag and time for a shift in strategy.
“There may be something structurally wrong that needs to be diagnosed and changed,” says Julie Whelan, global head of occupier thought leadership at CBRE, a commercial real estate services and investment firm.
Whelan suggests reevaluating, for instance, how performance is measured. So if a salesperson is meeting sales quotas but not in the office, then there’s a disconnect between what success means to them and what their company is asking them to do from an office standpoint.
There may also be generational mindsets at play in which older workers may not understand why people aren’t back in the office five days a week the way people have always worked in decades past. “The reality is that companies must make sure that when people are in the office together, they have enough space and it’s a good environment,” she says.
The End of the Conversation?
That said, it could be time to end the whole return to the office conversation, argues Debbie Lovich, managing director and senior partner in the Boston office of Boston Consulting Group.
“It’s the wrong conversation,” says Lovich. “It’s a symptom of a much bigger issue that all organizations need to face, which is rethinking how to be employee-centric.”
Lovich believes organizations must focus on how to set up a work environment where people can be their best, and focus on how to ensure employees get joy from their work.
“Companies are seeing poor performance and correlating that with badge swipe data, and then they’re doing the absolute wrong thing and telling people to get into the office and thinking that performance will improve. But it doesn’t work that way. It’s only going to drive your best people to leave or be less motivated,” she says.
Lovich compares the necessary evolution to the shift that has occurred over the past several decades from focusing on only shareholder value, to customer value to now, hopefully, employee value. It’s not simply about engagement but rather, whether people find joy or enjoyment in their work, she says.
A Holistic View of What Works
Leaders must build the capabilities of managers to think holistically about the work their team needs to do and what their individual team members need to be their best, and then work with their teams to define the working model that works best for their work and their teams, she says. That model could include a hybrid schedule, day-to-day routines and rhythms, communication modes and more.
Lovich says it’s important for company leaders to understand what creates “toil,” or unproductive work versus “green time,” or productive, enjoyable work. This is especially true when companies look to deploy artificial intelligence. Leaders, she says, should ensure they’re not just focusing on tech driving productivity but also creating more joy for their team.
She argues that companies need to invest in understanding and designing for employee joy with the same rigor they do customer experience. The silver bullet for leaders will be for executives to walk in the shoes of your employees day to day, who are coming in, similar to customer ethnography.
“It’s following them around and seeing everything that’s broken,” she says. “They’re schlepping in over an hour on the subway to sit in a cubicle all day and do Zoom calls.”
Even a 5% to 10% reduction in employee attrition can have a significant impact on productivity that “dwarfs” the productivity argument for in-office work. She also notes that employees who reported enjoying their work were 50% less likely to be actively or passively looking for a new job.
“Create the space that’s right for your team with quiet spaces and collaborative spaces, but where people feel valued and respected and supported and trusted,” says Lovich. That, in the end, may matter more than mandates.
