Don't Want To Go Back To Workplace

[TylerM4]

Good post Tyler. There are a lot of logistical challenges associated with any major transition, but I know from the networking I’ve done that many, if not most businesses that have this option have made dramatically successful changes already. As you’ve noted, and what I had hoped we might discuss, is the many benefits that could ultimately come out of this transition. Evolution, including social and political evolution is inevitable and the process provides opportunity, and the last thing we want is “thinkers” who don’t want to change because of some misguided assumption that these old practices are human behavioural characteristics that have been in place for thousands of years. Yikes. Our destructive drug laws haven’t worked for the last hundred years and most conservatives would also have us double down on what hasn’t been working up to now. This is just another example of how uncomfortable some people are with change, or what is unknown.

Thanks

When I mentioned logistical challenges associated with hybrid approach, I mean challenges more associated with the approach itself vs transitioning to such a model.

I've been involved in exploring this at the company I work for including being part of a "Re-imagining office workspace" working group exploring options for continuing to allow work from home post Pandemic. 100's of employees will be impacted by what we come up with. The working group has landed on hybrid approach as our preferred model. I'll attempt to share some of the challenges we've encountered while exploring this idea.

But before I get into that, there's some information I'd like to share to set the stage for those who may read this but not have the experience/context: Once businesses get to a certain size, changes that have a financial impact to a company require a LOT of diligence to "prove it's a good decision". Small and Medium business decisions are often made on instinct or simply because the owner thinks it's a good idea. But large businesses (especially when it comes to public sector or publicly traded businesses that are accountable to taxpayers/shareholders) there is almost always what's called a "business case" required to support the decision and gather approval. You must prove that the cost of the decision will "pay off". For example: If we spend $xxxxx we will save $xxxx a year paying off the initial investment within x years - after that it's all profit" Or "If we spend $xxxxx we will increase sales by xx%". Why is this important for the discussion at hand? Well, it's because developing a business case for the scenario of employees working from home becomes a challenge. Most of the benefit of such a change is around employee satisfaction, increased ability to hire, wider talent pool to select from, etc. Those benefits are very difficult to attach a $$ value to. It's also important to recognize that every change has cost associated. Even if it's not a direct cost like buying furniture and equipment for employees to take home. There are indirect costs associated with the costs of employee time - eg drafting new policies, communicating changes and answering questions, Workplace health and safety evaluations, inefficiencies/time associated with streamlining tasks/processes to suit working from home, etc.

So, keeping the above in mind - most businesses working toward allowing employees to work from home are using "Cost savings associated with not having to maintain/own/lease office space" as the primary business case for justifying a transition to working from home.

When it comes to a hybrid approach (working some days in office, some days at home) this is where things get tricky. You need to reduce the office space requirement, while still allowing space for employees to come to the office periodically. Generally speaking this means doing away with reserved desks/workplaces and adopting shared desks/workspaces.

Now let's consider why the hybrid model is appealing: Generally the main drivers fall into 2 categories:
1) Work that can't be done at home, but also only represents only a portion of what an employee does - the rest he/she can do at home.
2) To help build/maintain relationships. Most businesses now recognize the power of relationships. A universal trait of high functioning businesses is good relationships (Employee and management, employee to employee, supplier relationships, etc.) Video conference is great and all, but noting beats face to face communication when it comes to relationship building. Especially when it comes to establishing personal relationships that result in personal investment and a desire to see the other succeed vs indifference.

Here's some of the challenges we've come across while building a hybrid plan that realizes those benefits:
Work that can't be done at home:
- A scheduled day of the week or some other system is required to avoid situations where multiple employees plan to use the same workspace on the same day.
- Often this work isn't something easily planned/scheduled. Even if the work can be delayed until the next scheduled "in the office day" there is an impact due to that delay. Poorer customer server/longer wait times for example.
- One approach to dealing with the above problem if you have a large enough team is to have 1 person working in the office at all times "for things that can only be done in the office". What happens when that person is sick and unable to come to the office?
- Work that can't be done from home often involves specialized equipment/workspace. Will that equipment/workspace be utilized when the employee is working from home? If not - there isn't a lot of benefit to the company to have that employee working from home.


Relationship building:
- A scheduled day of the week or some other system is required to avoid situations where multiple employees plan to use the same workspace on the same day.
- Generally the day(s) that the employee is to be in the office would coincide with activities that best lead to relationship building and/or for difficult conversations that will benefit from more intimate setting/relationship.
- Similar challenges with delays. Does the meeting/discussion now need to wait for the "in the office day"? Delays cost money and/or result in a reduction in service.
- By nature, shared workspaces can't include "everyone at the same time". Different people/teams are in the office on different days. If the whole point is to enable in-person communication and relationship building how do you consistently do that when only a fraction of the company is actually in the office on the same day? It works great for team based meetings/activities, but quickly falls apart when it comes to cross team meetings/activities as not everyone will be in the office at the same date/time. This has been identified as the single biggest challenge.
- Shared workspaces should be kept free from personal items. Employees like their personal items, pictures of loved ones, etc.
- Shared workspaces are difficult to optimize for specific employee needs. Got someone who can't handle bright light, tall or short employees, etc? It becomes difficult to accommodate them without impacting others who don't have those specific needs.

Despite writing a book here, I'm glossed over much of the challenges and considerations only hitting the high points. But I hope this gives everyone some insight into how what seems like a simple topic can quickly become complex and challenging. Noting insurmountable, but certainly not done at the snap of a finger either.

[rustled]

When I mentioned logistical challenges associated with hybrid approach, I mean challenges more associated with the approach itself vs transitioning to such a model.

I've been involved in exploring this at the company I work for ...
SNIP
... I hope this gives everyone some insight into how what seems like a simple topic can quickly become complex and challenging. Noting insurmountable, but certainly not done at the snap of a finger either.

Like!

[TylerM4]

Reading this thread....Holy totally different soft and spoiled work environments Batman ....the light is too bright, desk is too short, relationships in the office are healthy and happy, home- life-work happiness/ mental well being, good/bad employee attitudes.... Surprised I haven't read something about a 'safe space' (or whatever its called) to cry in private when the avocado toast delivery is late.

It's not the 60's anymore

Gone are the days when employees don't need to work as part of a team and were happy simply to have a job. These are office spaces, not construction sites.

You may see things like light sensitivity and accommodations for height, etc as "soft and spoiled". For employees tho, this could be very impactful and may result in migraine headaches, reparative strain injury, etc. That costs the business far more than dimming some lights and adjusting the height of equipment. Fire them for experiencing this, you're on the loosing end of a lawsuit. Generally speaking - good skilled employees are not easy to come buy, but dimming the lights is easy to do. It's simply smart business.

If you don't understand the power of relationships and employee satisfaction along with how they influence the success or failure of a business, well frankly you are not well suited to be a manager/leader/business owner. That's fine, many aren't - just recognize that it also means you're not in a position to criticize the decisions of those that do understand.

[The Green Barbarian]

It's not the 50's anymore grandpa Gone are the days when employees were happy simply to have a job.

Until the next great Depression hits and all of this touchy-feely garbage goes by the wayside. And it won't be another two year paid vacation like COVID either, the current governments have peed away that option with their high unsustainable spending.

[TylerM4]

Until the next great Depression hits and all of this touchy-feely garbage goes by the wayside. And it won't be another two year paid vacation like COVID either, the current governments have peed away that option with their high unsustainable spending.

Human nature isn't going to change with a depression.

Yes, a great depression would allow employers to treat employees poorly and not have them quit. They won't perform well, and the business will find that as soon the the depression passes the employees leave for better employers resulting in either having to adapt or close - but during an actual depression yes they could take advantage of the situation.

I'm frankly surprised that the employer making easy concessions to allow their employees to work more comfortably and while also encouraging an environment where relationships can build and thrive (nobody is doing relationship building exercises here or forcing people to "have relationships") is seen as "Touchy Feely garbage"

Employee: "I get miserable migraine headaches when under bright office lights for too long. Can we remove the bulbs out of the light fixture above my desk?"
Green Barbarian and OldTrucker: "NO "

You'd make for well loved bosses I'm sure!

[normaM]

and I wonder where the bulbs would be placed
Anyone thinking ppl are actually working from home - delusional
Best.gig. ever.
I call places I would get a response in under 30 mins
Now I get the lame " sorry I was away for a bit" aka, grocery run, walk the dog, blah blah
Shampoo companies must be weeping

[barianqueen]

One perk I really enjoy from home is not having issues to deal with smoker employees. I always hated trying to enter or exit my building and get a bunch of smoke in my face from people ignoring ‘clear air intake’ signs.

[Sparki55]

Sure will be fun to see working from home businesses fail that assume the failure didn't come from working from home.

I've tried it, it sucks.

Even to just have HR working from home is impossible. Something about going into their office with a problem vs a zoom call is wildly different.

Working from home pushes collaboration and Innovation to the back burner. It removes competition, comradery and ethics from discussion. It didn't even work for software teams... Look it up.

[lifegives]

Adapt or die.

Some comments here will apply to some businesses. And other comments will apply to others. In a way everyone is correct, but for different reasons, and some will be sustainable and others won't. The pandemic was a great evolutionary stressor, expect change.

[Gilchy]

Human nature isn't going to change with a depression.

Yes, a great depression would allow employers to treat employees poorly and not have them quit. They won't perform well, and the business will find that as soon the the depression passes the employees leave for better employers resulting in either having to adapt or close - but during an actual depression yes they could take advantage of the situation.

I'm frankly surprised that the employer making easy concessions to allow their employees to work more comfortably and while also encouraging an environment where relationships can build and thrive (nobody is doing relationship building exercises here or forcing people to "have relationships") is seen as "Touchy Feely garbage"

Employee: "I get miserable migraine headaches when under bright office lights for too long. Can we remove the bulbs out of the light fixture above my desk?"
Green Barbarian and OldTrucker: "NO "

You'd make for well loved bosses I'm sure!

Not sure why it's a hard concept to grasp. Happy workers are productive workers.

[The Green Barbarian]

Human nature isn't going to change with a depression.

But the amount of available jobs will. To the point where you can't just pick and choose, or make demands of the employer that are just plain crazy.

Yes, a great depression would allow employers to treat employees poorly and not have them quit.

Or have to work under conditions where they are being held accountable instead of hiding at home. Funny that it's just seen as "treating employees poorly" - that's just sanctimonious psycho-babble. The employees will be treated just fine, they just aren't allowed to demand outrageous things and get it because the supply/demand will dictate otherwise.

They won't perform well,

Why not?? That's just being a giant man-baby at that point. Boo - hoo!! I only get a paycheque and benefits and vacations, but I don't get to bring my dog into work every day, so I'm going to under-perform! What a joke.

and the business will find that as soon the the depression passes the employees leave for better employers resulting in either having to adapt or close - but during an actual depression yes they could take advantage of the situation.

Or the employees stay because they have built up loyalty to an employer who kept them employed through tough times. Only a total loser would jump ship at the first opportunity after having their employer stick by them like that.

I'm frankly surprised that the employer making easy concessions to allow their employees to work more comfortably and while also encouraging an environment where relationships can build and thrive (nobody is doing relationship building exercises here or forcing people to "have relationships") is seen as "Touchy Feely garbage"

And I'm even more surprised that you honestly think that "relationships can build and thrive" while your unaccountable employee hides at home. It's just a silly assertion built on nothing.

You'd make for well loved bosses I'm sure!

For sure! And you'd be the boss that everyone would laugh at behind your back because you cave on everything, all in the name of "I hope that you're happy now...oh you're not?? Anything else I can give you just name it, wouldn't want you to "not perform...." Such a joke.

[TylerM4]

Well Green,

I'm not going to be able to explain to you the social dynamics of white collar business and offices involving skilled labor. It's obvious you have no experience working in such an environment. Being the tough/strict boss doesn't fly in those environments.

These aren't the type of jobs where the boss can look over the shoulder all day. Often the employees are doing jobs/tasks that the boss himself simply can't do due to lack of skills, experience, etc. In many cases, the boss is asking the employee "How long will that take?" vs saying "This task should take xxx minutes to complete". The stark reality (I know you won't believe it but whatever) is that these workers work hard because they WANT TO, not because the boss forces them to. An employee who doesn't want to work hard will always have some sort of a plausible reason/excuse that's very difficult to prove false. It sounds so easy "Just make them do their job"... lol.

Furthermore, these employees know their worth and value to the company. This is skilled labor, you generally don't have people lined up to easily fill the seat, and even if you do - it takes months to orient and train to the point where they are a productive employee. Having them quit is often a costly blow to the business and they're confident they'll get equal or better employment somewhere else unless you want to attempt to buy their loyalty. But here's something just about every manager knows - keeping them happy such that they don't go elsewhere by making small concessions with the office space is FAR CHEAPER than buying their loyalty and paying a higher wage than everyone else is paying.

I've worked in other environments. I've worked in the service industry, I've worked in trades/construction. Much of your approach/outlook (despite being outdated) would work in that environment. Too bad most of those jobs aren't something you can transition to doing from home.

[The Green Barbarian]

Well Green,

I'm not going to be able to explain to you the social dynamics of white collar business and offices involving skilled labor. It's obvious you have no experience working in such an environment.

And it's obvious you know nothing about me, so spare me the sanctimony.

Being the tough/strict boss doesn't fly in those environments.

And I find it funny that you think that this is some black and white issue. If everyone doesn't do exactly what you think should be done, then they're a "tough/strict" boss. It's not about being tough and strict, it's about providing a work environment that people can succeed in. And that's that.

Much of your approach/outlook (despite being outdated) would work in that environment. Too bad most of those jobs aren't something you can transition to doing from home.

LOL - my approach isn't "outdated" and that's just a load of blarney. You've just decided that whatever your way is, is the best way. As I said, if/when things get tough, and we get hit with a great depression, all of this nonsense disappears. And that's not to say that the employees will be "treated poorly", they're just going to have to perform at a much higher level, a level I'm not seeing right now with so many professionals working from home.

[TylerM4]

OK. While you guys wait for economic collapse to resolve these issues, I'm going to continue to working towards a respectful workplace. I guess time will tell what the better approach is.

[spooker]

LOL - my approach isn't "outdated" and that's just a load of blarney. You've just decided that whatever your way is, is the best way. As I said, if/when things get tough, and we get hit with a great depression, all of this nonsense disappears. And that's not to say that the employees will be "treated poorly", they're just going to have to perform at a much higher level, a level I'm not seeing right now with so many professionals working from home.

I don't believe I've ever seen someone attempt to argue that it's acceptable for managers to be grumpy and hostile. Accomodating simple requests to foster a friendly workplace culture is "nonsense."

I'm glad I don't work for some of you guys. Yeesh.

I love the fact that he's arguing that it's good for business for employees to be in fear of losing their jobs ...