As summer fades into the distance, it appears that many employers are set upon pressing for a return to the ways of working that were the norm before the pandemic. But it is also apparent that employees are equally determined to avoid such a situation. In the words of Mick Heys, vice-president of Future of Workplace and Imaging in Europe at the market intelligence firm International Data Corporation, there is “a great mismatch,” where “employers want people back more than employees want to go back.”
As the leader of IDC’s research on hybrid working, Heys has seen enough to be convinced that the efforts of many executives to mandate certain numbers of days in the office are unlikely to be worthwhile. In an exclusive interview ahead of the publication of a fascinating report on hybrid working, he says that pandemics always lead to permanent changes in behavior and this one will be no different.
One of the reasons cited for the need for a return to office working for at least part of the week is a concern about falling productivity (although there appear to be as many surveys claiming that remote working increases productivity as there are studies suggesting it decreases it.) Another is the need to inculcate culture, especially among new joiners and younger employees. Still another is the desire to promote collaboration.
While recognizing the importance of these issues, Heys suggests that the way to solve them does not lie in “obsessing about the number of days” people spend in the office. He urges organizations to think more broadly about what they were trying to achieve, and how. Instead of monitoring employee attendance through such methods as analysing security card swipes, which harks back to the days of factory owners requiring workers to clock in and out, organizations should be thinking about the links between trust, purpose and productivity. “No business’s purpose is to have as many people in the office as possible,” he says.
Even allowing for the fact that the IDC InfoBrief in question is sponsored by Shure, the maker of microphones and related equipment, the importance of audio to the success or otherwise of hybrid working is worthy of consideration. Think of the number of times you have had an unsatisfactory connection with colleagues attending remote meetings. Or about the occasions when the sound quality was so poor that you effectively let the meeting wash over you or resorted to checking email messages.
One might dispute the finding that the fewer than 10% of organizations that have invested in the right technology and have adopted good standardised practices are much more likely to be financially thriving than those that do not. But it is hard to argue with the suggestion that poor audio technology can be a key cause of a sense of isolation and stress for workers involved in hybrid meetings. Among the “pain points” identified by the study, which involved telephone interviews across the U.S., the U.K., China, Japan, France and Germany, are trouble finding a “natural discussion flow,” being easily distracted and those calling in from remote locations not being able to participate as fully as those in the office. “Despite the general belief, return-to-the-office policies are not the only way to boost collaboration and corporate culture,” says the report. “Technology that delivers digital equivalency can be an effective way to address the issue.”
Part of the problem appear to be that executives — seeing that, even with the call for a return to the office, on any given day many people will not be in the office — are rushing to buy equipment without paying sufficient attention to its quality. The poor meeting experiences that result, rather than improving collaboration and culture building, make the problem worse.
The way to deal with what the report calls this “circle of frustration” is to set the correct criteria based on input from the right people when buying technology. This improvement in the quality of audio and other aspects will lead to people having a better experience, making better decisions and improved productivity. With the improvement in communication and culture, employees are likely to see the office as “a productivity hub” rather than “a mandated destination causing an employer-employee divide.”
At Shure itself, there is a recognition that moving to such an approach requires great efforts, not just from human resources professionals but from all leaders. Shure’s chief information officer, Robin Hamerlinck, says that some departments, such as hers, which have been used to being hybrid and working strange hours, will find the transition easier, but others will require more focused efforts. Interviewed ahead of the publication of the report, she said that executives would need to “go above and beyond” in order to engage new joiners. The average induction process would not be enough and there would have to be increased mentoring and special events to draw them into the organisation, she added. Hybrid working means the company can hire people wherever they are, but “as the team gets more spread out you have to do more to help them feel part of the mission.”
Read the full article here