ReportWire

Tag: Hybrid workforce

  • New Study Reveals Why Not Investing in the Work-From-Home Office of Hybrid Employees Has Dire Consequences

    New Study Reveals Why Not Investing in the Work-From-Home Office of Hybrid Employees Has Dire Consequences

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    A new study by Logitech of 3,000 employees and 1,000 IT hardware decision-makers in large organizations found that 89% struggle with video and 85% with audio in their work-from-home office. Less than 40% received accessories other than mice and keyboards from their organizations.

    While these results are concerning, I didn’t find them surprising. When working with client organizations to help them figure out the best hybrid work arrangements, I invariably get pushback when I bring up investing in hybrid worker home offices. CFOs don’t want to “waste” money on employee home offices after already paying for a set-up at the office; in turn, IT and facilities directors express reluctance to stretch their already-thin resources to support the tech and ergonomic needs of staff working from home.

    After all, these leaders say, we already gave in to employee demands for flexibility and allowed them to work from home part of the time. They can pay for their own equipment and furniture.

    Related: They Say Remote Work Is Bad For Employees, But Most Research Suggests Otherwise — A Behavioral Economist Explains.

    The reality of work from home office setups for hybrid employees

    In reality, the large majority of workers don’t pay to equip their home offices. When I ask about this issue in focus groups for my clients, employees tell me it’s the company’s job to fund their work-from-home needs. They feel it would be unfair for them to buy whatever they need for their home office just for the sake of doing work for the company. Indeed, in a survey I ran on LinkedIn with over 200 respondents, over two-thirds of respondents believe companies should cover the costs of equipment.

    So they end up struggling with technology and ergonomic challenges. Doing so harms their productivity since they can’t work as effectively. It undermines their wellbeing, due to physical discomfort from lack of ergonomic furniture and mental discomfort from concerns about how they appear on camera. It undercuts retention because employees feel frustrated and resentful over not having the equipment they need to do their job well.

    And it hurts their collaboration and communication: poor video and audio quality are a bigger problem for those the employee is communicating with rather than for the employee themselves. That involves other employees, but also external stakeholders, such as clients, vendors and investors.

    Related: Avoid These 3 Tempting Habits For Remote Work Productivity

    All of that harms a company’s bottom lines: as I tell leaders with whom I work, do they really want to lose a sale because they didn’t get a good microphone for their sales staff? That’s not an exaggeration: the Logitech study found that 37% of respondents hold video calls with clients.

    With 79% of companies switching to a hybrid work modality, according to the EY Work Reimagined Employer Survey, a large portion of the work employees do for a company will be done from home offices going forward. Given that, I tell my clients that it’s imperative to invest in equipping staff for work from home.

    Logitech insights on challenges and opportunities for the work-from-home office

    To find out more about the challenges and opportunities of equipping hybrid workers, I interviewed Simon Dudley, Head of Analyst Relations at Logitech, about the release of their study. He told me that Logitech discovered a common experience among most survey respondents.

    At the start of the pandemic, companies told staff to grab whatever they could from the office in the transition to remote work. And that’s what staff mostly ended up using for their home office, along with whatever additional equipment more tech-savvy staff had at home or, in some instances, chose to buy online. IT departments adopted a reactive posture: as Dudley stated, “IT departments sit there and basically wait for the phone to ring for someone to complain, at which point they go and try and fix that problem.” The problem with that posture? Most staff members “don’t even know what they could do to make their life better. But they do know what they’ve got today isn’t great.”

    The Logitech study confirms employee concerns: 64% struggle with poor or inadequate light in their homes; 60% have poor sound quality through computer speakers; and 58% need to sit in an uncomfortable position to be on camera. They waste valuable work time figuring out technology: 53% check if their speakers and microphone are working, 41% fiddle with the viewing angle of their camera, and so on.

    Yet staff don’t feel it’s right or fair for them to purchase better equipment and furniture themselves, and don’t feel empowered to reach out to IT or facilities to fix these problems. As Dudley said “the users are like, well, I assume this is the best that’s available. I mean, they’ve given me a laptop. I’ve got all the things, how can I say to the IT department, I want better when they don’t even know better exists?”

    Of course, it’s not only IT and facilities that need to step up. Dudley pointed out that HR needs to get involved. After all, they are responsible for talent management. Optimizing employee productivity, wellbeing and collaboration through support for worker home offices should be a major concern for them. Dudley told me that it’s simple: just go to HR and ask them “how much does it cost you when your workers are off sick with RSI issues or with eye strain or with migraines.” By comparison, the cost of equipping a home office is small, and this wellbeing benefit doesn’t account for boosted productivity and collaboration.

    Related: Malcolm Gladwell’s Fears About Remote Work Are Real. It’s Your Brain That’s Telling You Lies — Here’s Why.

    Work from home office funding: A case study

    Then, I asked Dudley to give feedback on how I helped my consulting clients determine how to support the home offices of their workers, using the example of the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute.

    First, we surveyed staff to determine their needs and concerns regarding technology and furniture, focusing on how we can help them be more productive and have better ergonomics and wellbeing. We encouraged employees to volunteer any suggestions on specific technology and furniture solutions they found to be a good fit for their needs. We also had the Institute’s IT and facilities staff conduct in-depth research on market options based on survey results.

    Then, we determined an initial list of standardized equipment that IT and facilities felt comfortable they could support in employee home offices. We shared the list with staff members in another survey and revised it based on their responses.

    Next, we purchased equipment for staff members and shipped it to their homes. For anyone who needed help with the equipment, we arranged for home visits by IT and facilities staff. To address tax concerns, we developed a policy asking staff members leaving the organization to donate any bulky furniture that was impractical to return to facilities. Finally, we covered the costs of fast broadband for staff.

    Dudley applauded this approach as exemplary. He did highlight that sometimes staff don’t know what they need because they may not be aware of relevant capabilities, and thus encouraged providing more hands-on guidance and expertise. I integrated that approach into my work with future clients.

    Conclusion

    In short, failing to invest in hybrid worker home offices is penny-wise, but pound-foolish. We know that much if not most of the work done by staff members for the large majority of companies going forward will be from home offices. And most employees won’t buy quality tech and furniture: they feel it’s not fair to ask them to do so. Companies that fail to invest in home offices will lose out on productivity, wellbeing, retention, collaboration and communication, all of which will reflect poorly on their bottom lines.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • Starbucks and Disney Forces Employees Back to The Office, But Is Your Company Next?

    Starbucks and Disney Forces Employees Back to The Office, But Is Your Company Next?

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Given the extensive headlines about Disney and Starbucks ordering employees back to the office, you might think that it’s the beginning of a new back-to-office return across the board. Yet do such headlines represent the reality of a new wave or are they just clickbait for anxious workers who want to avoid the threat of a forced office return?

    Recent survey data from The Conference Board provides a surprising insight into how companies are approaching the hybrid workplace policy. After surveying 1,100 corporate executives across several industries around the globe, including 24% from the U.S., The Conference Board revealed that Disney and Starbucks represent the exception, not the rule. In fact, of the CEOs from the U.S., a tiny proportion — 3% — indicated they would decrease the availability of remote work in their companies. Disney and Starbucks belong to that 3%.

    By contrast, 5% said they would expand it. For example, consider Elon Musk at Twitter. After initially ordering all Twitter staff back to the office, he now reversed course. He embraced remote work by closing Twitter’s Seattle and Singapore offices, telling all staff to work remotely.

    In short, it’s likely that 2023 will see a slight expansion of employees working remotely. These findings suggest that the majority of companies are finding the hybrid workplace policy to be a successful solution for their organization.

    Case study: Hybrid workplace policy success

    One example of a company that has successfully implemented a hybrid workplace policy is a large financial services company, which I know from consulting for it. Prior to the pandemic, this company had a traditional in-office work model. However, as the pandemic hit, the company quickly shifted to remote work in order to keep employees safe.

    As the pandemic progressed, the company realized that remote work was not only effective but also improved employee satisfaction. They, therefore, decided to adopt a hybrid workplace policy that allowed employees to work both remotely and in-office. This approach has allowed the company to continue operating effectively, while also supporting the unique needs of its employees.

    Related: They Say Remote Work Is Bad For Employees, But Most Research Suggests Otherwise — A Behavioral Economist Explains.

    Case Study: Hybrid workplace policy challenges

    Another example is a mid-size IT services company. They initially struggled with the transition to remote work and the hybrid workplace policy, as their industry requires face-to-face interactions with clients. They soon realized that the lack of collaboration and communication between employees working remotely and in-office resulted in a decline in productivity and employee satisfaction.

    To address this, the company brought me in to advise them on improving their approach. With my advice, they implemented a number of measures to improve collaboration and communication, such as weekly one-on-ones between supervisors and supervisees, and setting clear expectations for communication and collaboration. These measures have helped to stabilize the company’s performance, and the hybrid workplace policy is now working well for them.

    Benefits of hybrid workplace policy

    One of the key benefits of the hybrid workplace policy is the increased flexibility it provides for employees. Remote work can offer a better work-life balance, as well as the ability to work from locations that may be more convenient for employees. This can lead to increased job satisfaction and employee retention, which can be especially important in a competitive job market.

    Additionally, the hybrid workplace policy can also lead to cost savings for companies. By reducing the need for office space, companies can lower their overhead costs, and potentially save on costs such as electricity, internet, and office supplies.

    Cognitive biases and hybrid workplace policy

    However, it’s important to note that implementing a hybrid workplace policy is not without its challenges. One potential issue is the impact of cognitive biases on decision-making. For example, the availability heuristic, which refers to the tendency for people to base their judgments on information that is most easily available to them, may lead leaders to rely too heavily on their personal experiences with remote work rather than considering the unique needs and circumstances of their organization.

    Another cognitive bias that may come into play is the sunk cost fallacy, which refers to the tendency for people to continue investing in a decision or strategy because they have already invested resources into it, even if it’s not the most effective solution. This can lead leaders to persist with their initial hybrid workplace policy even if it’s not working well for their organization, instead of getting advice and training on how to improve their approach to hybrid work.

    Related: A Pervasive Myth Employers Believe That Is Hurting Their Remote Workforce

    Conclusion

    The Covid-19 pandemic has forced companies to rethink their approach to work. The hybrid workplace policy has emerged as a popular solution for many organizations, as it allows for a more flexible and adaptable approach to work. However, it’s important for leaders to be aware of the potential impact of cognitive biases on decision-making when implementing a hybrid workplace policy. Through careful planning and regular reviews, companies can successfully navigate the challenges of the hybrid workplace policy and stabilize their business.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • 26% of U.S. Workers Would Rather Undergo a Root Canal Than Follow This Workplace Policy

    26% of U.S. Workers Would Rather Undergo a Root Canal Than Follow This Workplace Policy

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    According to a recent survey conducted by job site Monster, more than one in four (26%) U.S. workers would rather undergo a root canal procedure than work in their offices five days a week. Additionally, nearly two in five (38%) workers said they would quit a job that required just one day onsite. These staggering statistics reveal a clear shift in workers’ attitudes towards the traditional office environment, and companies that fail to adapt to this change risk losing their most valuable asset: their employees.

    As a highly experienced expert in the field of hybrid work, I talk with 5 to 10 leaders every week about how to make hybrid work serve their needs well. I ask them what their top concern is, and most say it’s hiring and retaining talented staff.

    External surveys say the same thing, such as this recent survey by Vistage of the leaders of small and medium-sized businesses. It found that 60% of SME CEOs are planning to increase headcount in the year ahead, with only 7% planning on reducing headcount. According to Vistage Chief Research Officer Joe Galvin, this is a significant shift from the trend of big companies making headlines with layoffs, as small and medium business CEOs are reluctant to lay off their hard-won new employees. One key reason for this shift is the recognition that hiring challenges are impacting the ability of these businesses to operate at full capacity. With 61% of CEOs saying that hiring challenges are a major concern for their ability to operate effectively at full capacity.

    Given this information, I confidently tell the leaders whom I advise that the future of work is in a flexible hybrid work model that allows for some full-time remote work. This model not only keeps workers happy and engaged, but it also has a positive impact on a company’s bottom line.

    Related: You Should Let Your Team Decide Their Approach to Hybrid Work. A Behavioral Economist Explains Why and How You Should Do It.

    Increased productivity and employee engagement

    One of the most significant benefits of a flexible hybrid work model is increased productivity and employee engagement. Studies have shown that remote workers tend to work more efficiently and are less likely to experience burnout. A mid-size IT services company that I consulted for implemented a flexible working policy, and they saw a 20% increase in productivity among their remote workers.

    Remote workers have the ability to create their own personalized work environment, which leads to an increase in productivity. They can work from a location that is most comfortable for them, whether that be their home, a coffee shop or a coworking space. This leads to a decrease in distractions and an increase in focus, resulting in a higher level of productivity.

    Flexible working also has a positive impact on employee engagement. When employees have the ability to work in a way that suits them best, they are more likely to be engaged and motivated. This leads to a decrease in turnover, and an increase in employee loyalty and job satisfaction.

    Access to a wider talent pool

    A flexible hybrid work model also allows companies to tap into a wider talent pool. When companies are not limited by geographical location, they can attract and retain the best talent from all over the world. A large financial services company that I worked with had difficulty finding qualified candidates in their local area, but by implementing a flexible working policy, they were able to hire top talent from other parts of the country.

    A flexible working policy also allows for a more diverse workforce, as it can attract candidates who may have previously been excluded due to geographical constraints. This diversity leads to new perspectives, ideas and innovation.

    Cost savings on talent

    Flexible working can also lead to significant cost savings for companies. A flexible hybrid work model reduces the need for office space, and it can also lead to a reduction in absenteeism and turnover. A retail company that I consulted for implemented a flexible working policy, and they saw a 30% reduction in absenteeism due to less workers taking sick days and a 20% reduction in turnover.

    When employees have the ability to work from home, it leads to a reduction in absenteeism as they are less likely to be affected by things such as traffic, weather, or public transportation issues. This can also lead to a decrease in sick leave, and an increase in overall productivity.

    Flexible working can also lead to a reduction in turnover, as employees are more likely to be satisfied and engaged in their work. This leads to a decrease in the cost of recruiting and training new employees.

    Addressing cognitive biases

    Cognitive biases can play a significant role in decision-making when it comes to flexible working. The status quo bias, for example, leads managers to resist change and stick to the traditional office environment. The sunk cost fallacy can also come into play, where managers may be reluctant to change the way things have always been done because they have invested so much time and resources into the current system. By being aware of these cognitive biases and actively working to overcome them, companies can make more informed and effective decisions about their working policies.

    One way to overcome these biases is to gather data and conduct studies on the impact of flexible working on employee productivity, engagement, and turnover. This can provide concrete evidence to support the implementation of a flexible hybrid work model. Additionally, it is important for managers to actively seek out feedback from employees on their preferences for working arrangements and to consider their needs and concerns.

    Implementing a flexible hybrid work model

    Implementing a flexible hybrid work model can seem daunting, but with proper planning and communication, it can be done successfully. It is important to set clear guidelines and expectations for remote work, such as setting specific hours of availability and ensuring regular communication with team members.

    It is also important to provide the necessary tools and resources for remote work, such as a reliable internet connection and a secure virtual communication platform. Providing training on hybrid work best practices and technology can also help to ensure a smooth transition, as can hiring a hybrid work consultant to guide your transition.

    Related: Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff Is Right. New Employees Are Less Productive in a Hybrid Work Setting — But Why?

    Conclusion

    The shift in workers’ attitudes toward the traditional office environment is undeniable. Companies that fail to adapt to this change risk losing their most valuable asset: their employees. A flexible hybrid work model that allows for some full-time remote work is the future for anyone who cares about worker retention, increased productivity, access to a wider talent pool, cost savings, and overcoming cognitive biases. The time for companies to implement this model is now. As a leader of a company, it’s important to recognize that the traditional office model may no longer be the best option for your employees or your business. By embracing a flexible hybrid work model, you can retain top talent, increase productivity and save costs. The future of work is here, and companies that adapt will be well-positioned for success.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • New Employees Are Less Productive in a Hybrid Work Setting — But Why?

    New Employees Are Less Productive in a Hybrid Work Setting — But Why?

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Marc Benioff, cofounder and co-CEO of Salesforce, recently sent a company-wide Slack message complaining about the low productivity of recent hires made during the pandemic and asked, “Are we not building tribal knowledge with new employees without an office culture?” Salesforce permits a high degree of flexibility for employees: teams and their leaders can choose what kind of work arrangements suit their needs best. But does such flexibility threaten the development and integration of recently-hired junior staff?

    That’s a concern raised by many companies I advise on transitioning to permanent hybrid work arrangements. They recognize that research shows staff are more productive working remotely, but worry this may not apply to junior staff who have not yet learned the systems, processes and practices of the company. They also worry about the professional growth and cultural integration of junior staff. After all, the future of any organization depends on developing its junior staff into future leaders.

    Thus, many leaders join Benioff in expressing serious reservations about a flexible hybrid model. Instead, they advocate for a return to the office as a means of addressing such concerns and reinvigorating what Benioff termed an “office culture.”

    I tell such leaders that their concerns are real and need to be addressed. Yet there’s no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Flexibility helps improve productivity and retention while cutting costs; it’s important and viable to find a win-win approach that retains these benefits while also facilitating the development of junior staff.

    In fact, a full-time office return is likely to have a negative effect on junior staff, not a positive one. According to the ADP Research Institute report, “People at Work 2022: A Global Workforce View,” Gen Z are the most likely age group to say that “if my employer insisted on me returning to my workplace full-time, I would consider looking for another job,” at 71%. By contrast, 56% of those 45-54 said they would consider looking for another job.

    Related: How Has Remote Work Impacted Our Relationships With Other Employees? The Findings of This Study Will Surprise You.

    Instead, the solutions I work on with clients involve a more targeted approach customized to the needs of junior staff. It does involve newer staff coming into the office more often, but not simply randomly: They’re not going to just pick up the culture and work habits of a company by osmosis, especially given that more experienced staff won’t be coming in as often as junior staff.

    What’s needed is a deliberate, intentional and structured program to facilitate their development and integration into company culture while maintaining flexible hybrid work arrangements. This policy is distinct from a company’s onboarding program, but should build on and plug into it, so that junior staff transition seamlessly from the onboarding program in their first several weeks into the development and integration program for the first couple of years.

    A key component of a hybrid development and integration program involves on-the-job training. Such training comes primarily in the form of senior staff responding immediately to questions and concerns raised by recent hires: showing them how to do the tasks associated with the role, guiding them into best practices and unwritten rules and norms and introducing them to important internal and external stakeholders. Likewise, such training involves senior staff observing the performance of junior staff and proactively providing them with feedback and suggestions for improvements.

    Fortunately, such on-the-job training can easily be done in a small-group style, with one senior staff member helping train six to eight junior employees. It takes having senior staff members coordinate schedules with junior staff to come to the office on the same days, and then work in the same open office space.

    All of the employees will work on their individual tasks. When a recent hire has a question, they ask it, and the experienced employee will answer and explain the context; doing so ensures that the whole group gets the benefit of the explanation, without the senior staffer having to repeat it for each person in a one-on-one training setting. Additionally, the senior staff member will occasionally walk around and check in on the tasks of junior staff members, providing them with guidance and coaching as needed. Again, this helps the whole group learn how to do this task.

    This kind of activity does impede the efficiency of senior staffers and needs to be considered in their performance evaluations as a service to the company. But this impediment is relatively small, because of a one-to-many dynamic of teaching many recent hires at once. No one person should be overburdened with training: this task should be distributed among a number of senior staffers known as good on-the-job trainers. It’s helpful for junior staff to get on-the-job training from a variety of senior staff members rather than from just a single individual; recent hires get multiple perspectives and tactics for accomplishing work outcomes, while also learning about and connecting with different networks and stakeholders within a company.

    As part of the development and integration program, it’s also helpful to provide formal mentoring for newer employees. Most of the mentoring should take place in the office since it’s easier to have conversations where recent hires can be vulnerable and admit a lack of confidence face-to-face, rather than via video conference.

    Make sure to have one senior staff member from the junior colleague’s immediate team. The goal of the senior person within their own team is to help the person with on-the-job learning specific to the team’s tasks and with understanding team dynamics. Also include two from outside the team. One should be from the junior staff members’ business unit, and another one should be from a different unit. At least one should be located in a different geographical area if the company is large enough. These two mentors will be needed to overcome one of the key problems uncovered by research on company culture in hybrid work: the decrease in cross-functional connections across the staff.

    Having three mentors decreases the burden on each, allowing meetings once or twice a month with each. As a result, such formal mentoring is easily manageable for experienced employees.

    What about the days when recent hires work remotely? To facilitate on-the-job learning through virtual settings, as well as to promote effective team collaboration, employ digital coworking. It involves team members spending an hour or two per day working on their own tasks while on a video conference call with their teammates.

    To start a digital coworking session, team members should first join a video conference call. During this call, each team member should share their plans to work on their own tasks for the session and then turn off their microphone while keeping their speakers on, with video optional. Then, team members work independently on their own tasks while still being able to communicate with each other by turning on their microphones if they have a question or comment. More experienced team members would then respond to the question, including using screen sharing or a virtual whiteboard to demonstrate how to complete a task. Digital coworking helps to replicate the experience of working alongside coworkers in a shared office space, which is helpful for on-the-job training for junior staffers.

    Related: Once a Skeptic, Elon Musk Now Embraces This Divisive Workplace Policy — and You Should, Too.

    Benioff isn’t wrong to call out the challenges in developing junior staff in a hybrid setting. Yet the solution doesn’t involve returning everyone to the office to ensure an “office culture.” Instead of a broad-brush approach that sacrifices flexibility, and its benefits for retention, productivity and cost savings, my clients find it helps to have a narrow, targeted approach that addresses the problem. The solution is a structured program that transitions recent hires smoothly from onboarding in the first several weeks into integration and development for the first couple of years, with in-office on-the-job training and mentoring, along with digital coworking.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5 Keys to Being an Effective Hybrid Manager

    5 Keys to Being an Effective Hybrid Manager

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    82% of all survey respondents have higher job satisfaction if they can work from anywhere, according to a new survey by VMware of 5,300 HR, IT, and business decision-makers and employees. Of those participants who work in a hybrid or remote modality, 56% say their teams have increased creativity and 55% report increased collaboration since before the pandemic. No wonder that 74% of U.S. companies are adopting a permanent hybrid model, according to research by Zippia.

    Yet middle managers are feeling the strain. A Future Forum survey shows that 43% of middle managers report burnout, more than any other group of workers. The particularly large burden on middle managers stems, in large part, from the burden of implementing company policies on hybrid work and the return to office. What happens typically, from my experience of helping 21 companies transition to hybrid work, is that executives decide on policies and leave it up to middle managers to implement them.

    That approach works well with clear, straightforward policies that managers know how to implement well based on prior experience. But managers have no experience with making the transition to hybrid work and then managing hybrid teams. Naturally, they try to shoehorn what they know — office-centric management methodologies — into hybrid-centric work. Then, they feel burned out when the results don’t measure up to expectations.

    Related: How Middle Management Can Drive Your Business Into the Ground

    Instead, to excel in the hybrid work transition and hybrid team leadership, managers need to adopt the five keys to hybrid management success, which differ markedly from office-centric management. These keys are intentionality, not automaticity; trust, not paranoia; autonomy, not micromanagement; connection, not presence; finally, accountability, not facetime.

    1. Intentionality, not automaticity

    It’s easy for managers to go on autopilot and do what they always did in the past. After all, why change something if it worked in the past, right? This conservative strategy works well — most of the time. The problem comes from the times when the context changes, such as the transition to hybrid work.

    A context shift requires a transformation from automaticity to intentionality. Instead of doing the same thing as before on autopilot, managers have to recognize the need to intentionally change their management style to fit the new context.

    Unfortunately, our brain is poorly suited to making such intentional changes, due to cognitive biases, which are mental blindspots that lead to poor decision-making.

    One of the biggest problems for effective management in hybrid work is the status quo bias, a desire to maintain or get back to a situation our brains perceive as comfortable and appropriate. This bias helps explain why managers are trying to turn back the clock to January 2020, a time when they were comfortable and in control.

    A related cognitive bias that poses a challenge for hybrid work management is called functional fixedness. When we have a certain perception of how to function, we ignore other possible ways to function, even if the new ones would offer a better fit for a changed situation. That’s why so many managers try to shoehorn office-centric management methods into hybrid work, despite the obvious problems with doing so.

    Addressing this set of problems requires middle managers to recognize when the context shifts, and then shift from automaticity into intentionality. They need to figure out the best methods to manage in this new environment while accepting that they will be uncomfortable and not know all the answers in doing so. Having helped 21 organizations make the transition to hybrid work — ranging from mid-size nonprofits such as the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute to Fortune 500 giants such as the high-tech manufacturer Applied Materials — I can attest that the discomfort that stems from the sense of losing control and confidence in their abilities poses the biggest obstacle for middle managers in effective hybrid management.

    2. Trust, not paranoia

    Microsoft released a new study, where it found that 85% of leaders say that the “shift to hybrid work has made it challenging to have confidence that employees are being productive.” This lack of trust in worker productivity has led to what Microsoft researchers termed productivity paranoia: “where leaders fear that lost productivity is due to employees not working, even though hours worked, the number of meetings and other activity metrics have increased.”

    This failure to trust their subordinates to be productive remotely goes squarely against the evidence. Extensive research — in the form of surveys, employee monitoring software and the gold standard of randomized control trials — conclusively demonstrates that employees are on average 5-10% more productive working remotely, especially on their individual tasks. And given we’re talking about hybrid work, employees can do their collaborative tasks in the office: that’s the best use for the office.

    However, middle managers have difficulty trusting that employees who they aren’t observing are being productive. Such a focus on having employees be visible in the office speaks to a highly traditionalist leadership mindset, underpinned by the illusion of control. This cognitive bias describes our mind’s tendency to overestimate the extent to which we control external events. The tendency is especially prevalent in executives who want to micromanage their employees. They believe that having employees present in the office guarantees productivity.

    In reality, research shows that in-office employees, even high-performing and productive ones, work much less than a full eight-hour day. They actually spend anywhere from 36% to 39% of their time working. The rest, according to these studies, is spent on other activities: checking social media, reading news websites, chit-chatting with colleagues about non-work topics, making non-work calls and even looking for other jobs.

    Middle managers need to learn to let go of their false beliefs that “when the cat’s away, the mice will play.” In fact, people will live up to your expectations: If you expect them to perform, and show you trust them, they will live up to your expectations, by and large. Moreover, the research clearly shows they will outperform when working from home on their individual tasks.

    Related: You Should Let Your Team Decide Their Approach to Hybrid Work. A Behavioral Economist Explains Why and How You Should Do It.

    3. Autonomy, not micromanagement

    The desire of many middle managers for control is not simply emphatically unrealistic. It also goes directly against a principle that we know is critical for productivity, engagement and innovation for office-based workers: the desire for autonomy.

    Studies show that we do our best work through intrinsic motivation, which involves autonomy and control over our work as a fundamental driver of effectiveness. Employees are most engaged, happy and productive when they have autonomy. A study of 307 companies finds that greater worker autonomy results in more innovation. And a recent survey by Metis indicated that 80% of respondents said they either prefer independence with moderate oversight (45%) or require a high level of independence at work (34.5%).

    For middle managers, a key component of autonomy in the post-pandemic environment involves giving workers flexibility and self-control of where and when they work, rather than trying to shoehorn them into the pre-pandemic “normal.” The best approach involves giving such flexibility to a whole team and having them determine their own approach to flexibility. When it comes to hybrid work, 46% of employees reported being engaged when their team determines their own policy of when to come into the office, according to a recent Gallup survey. By contrast, 41% of respondents are content to make the decision individually, and just 35% reported being engaged if leadership determines the top-down policy for everyone.

    Connection, not presence

    One of the biggest challenges for remote work involves addressing weakening connections among staff members. But only specific types of connections grew weaker. In fact, according to a recent survey by Covve, 67% report their overall relationships with colleagues grew stronger.

    Diving deeper, it’s the connections between team members that grow stronger when teams work part or full-time remotely, as research by Microsoft found. The problem comes from the decrease in cross-functional connections between teams, which weakens with remote work. Such “weak ties” are valuable for the kind of cross-disciplinary innovation that can drive growth, which might be hampered by remote work, according to an MIT study.

    In office-centric roles, weak ties form naturally from people on different teams being present in the same office. Yet in hybrid contexts, effective middle managers need to cultivate such weak ties intentionally.

    One way that managers can facilitate weak bonds involves in-person events that bring members of different teams. Middle managers can organize social events, such as happy hours, escape room trust-building events or group volunteer activities. Or they can offer in-person training that deliberately involves members of different teams interacting together. They can also consider remote social activities that help build weak ties, such as video game sessions or virtual escape rooms.

    Another tool of doing so: Scholars discovered that connecting junior staff with different senior staff as mentors offered a very effective way to extend the network and build the weak ties of junior staff. An added benefit: such pairings help junior staff gain on-the-job training and become integrated into the organization.

    Accountability, not facetime

    The traditional means of managers evaluating staff and holding them accountable relies on facetime: Seeing and talking to their subordinates throughout the year and giving them an annual review. In the hybrid work environment, this facetime approach is vulnerable to proximity bias, in other words, managers will value more highly those subordinates that they see more often.

    Indeed, a Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) survey of more than 800 supervisors found that 42% admitted they sometimes forget about remote workers when assigning tasks. This may explain why remote workers get promoted less often than their peers, despite being 15% more productive on average.

    Yet equating facetime to accountability is not only unsuitable for hybrid work; it also didn’t work well in the in-person environment, given that office-centric employees only spent 36% to 39% of their time working. Effective hybrid managers focus on meaningful goals and outcomes that advance their team’s business objectives, rather than the amount of time someone spent working.

    Doing so can be as easy as integrating a performance evaluation element into the weekly one-on-ones that many middle managers already schedule with their supervisees. At each weekly meeting, the manager and supervisee would agree on three to five key goals for the employee to achieve. Then, at the next meeting, the supervisee would report to the manager on how they did on the goals. The manager can coach the supervisee on solving any problems encountered, and provide a weekly performance evaluation. That way, all team members would know where they stand and any areas they need to work on to improve their performance. The meeting would end with the manager and supervisee agreeing on the three to five goals for the next week.

    Related: You Can’t Return to The Office Without Defeating These Four Major Battles

    Conclusion

    Intentionality, trust, autonomy, connection and accountability represent the five keys to turning a traditional office-centric manager into an effective hybrid manager. Abandoning office-centric methods requires acknowledging that we’ll never return to the past; the pandemic accelerated the existing trends toward hybrid work, and with ever-improving technology, the future will involve more time working remotely, not less. Still, the office represents a valuable place to gather, collaborate and socialize, and hybrid managers need to learn how to manage their teams effectively both in the work office and the home office. By understanding what kind of activities are best done where, and adopting managerial methods well-suited to hybrid work, modern managers will help their teams thrive in the increasingly-disrupted future of work.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • What is Staff Augmentation? 3 Reasons It is Vital For Your Business

    What is Staff Augmentation? 3 Reasons It is Vital For Your Business

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Recruiting and retaining exceptional talent is challenging and takes a lot of time, especially when companies in the tech space demand experienced developers and engineers.

    Moreover, filling in the gaps due to a lack of resources or specialists can be challenging and time-consuming at the same time, especially for high-tech roles like iOS developers or machine learning engineers, for which the demands have been escalating since the great resignation.

    This is where the model of staff augmentation comes into play! In this article, we will discuss the concept of staff augmentation, its increasing demand and why enterprises need to focus on in-house team expansion for quick hiring.

    Related: 10 Strategies for Hiring and Retaining New Employees

    Staff augmentation

    Staff augmentation is a type of cooperation model where businesses, from startups to corporate enterprises, source talent via staffing agencies to work with them temporarily to fill the talent gaps promptly.

    Today, staff augmentation has turned mainstream, with nearly $500 billion annual spending on global IT staffing services alone.

    Businesses now prefer partnering with staff augmentation service providers to boost the competency of their internal teams and accelerate the development process rather than spending weeks prospecting ideal candidates, conducting interviews and shortlisting candidates to fill an immediate talent gap.

    Related: 6 Ways to Effectively Navigate Market Turbulence in the IT World

    Why is staff augmentation surging in popularity?

    The staff augmentation model has been successful over recent years due to the following three reasons:

    1. It is suited for a hybrid work environment

    People willing to switch to low-paying remote jobs rather than continuing on-prem work in their previous settings indicate that the future of work is remote. Remote work is the new normal, especially in the technology and digital transformation sectors.

    Staff augmentation services are suited to cater to the needs of a remote-first global economy that still needs to prepare to let go of all the advantages of on-prem work. With this setting, businesses can extend support to their internal teams by partnering with staff augmentation service providers to cater to bridge talent gaps and meet deadlines faster.

    2. It is low risk compared to other outsourcing models

    The staff augmentation model triumphs over all the outsourcing models regarding flexibility, affordability and quality. Compared to other outsourcing models, the risks involved with staff augmentation services are zero to none due to constant collaboration with the internal teams.

    The augmented team or resource operates either as mere extensions of the internal teams or under the supervision of the in-house managers. Uninterrupted collaboration and seamless integrations of both teams eliminate any possibility of errors.

    Thus, the risk involved in this model is considerably lower than the other project outsourcing models like offshoring or managed services.

    3. Staff augmentation is flexible to scale without compromising sustainability

    As the global recession started knocking on the doors, the results of aggressive hiring and fierce spending started becoming more evident. Consequently, most businesses either stopped or at least cut-down spending on scaling by considerable margins.

    This phenomenon has kept thousands of global entrepreneurs from putting all the stakes in and investing aggressively in scaling their businesses. However, things have started to take quite an exciting turn as IT staffing, and resource augmentation services became mainstream.

    With IT staff augmentation, businesses no longer remain prone to compromising sustainability, as they can end contracts with external teams if things start going south.

    This model enables entrepreneurs to fuel their desires to achieve exponential growth and scalability without worrying about laying off permanent employees or (in the worst case scenario) signing up for bankruptcy.

    Related: 6 Ways to Effectively Navigate Market Turbulence in the IT World

    Why you need to start implementing the staff augmentation model

    The following facts and figures are clear evidence that the staff augmentation model is here to stay:

    1. The great resignation and the wake-up call

    The quiet quitting culture has been disturbing the workflow of organizations since the epidemic. Even amidst the global recession session, where companies like Meta and Amazon are forced to lay off a considerable part of their workforce, the culture of quiet quitting has not stopped.

    People silently leave their well-paying jobs due to a lack of serenity, toxic work environments, pay disparity or other reasons. As an entrepreneur, you should be prepared to deal with such cases within your organization.

    Although you must prioritize fostering a culture of collaboration and encouragement, you should also be prepared to fill in talent gaps in case a team member resigns on short notice rather than compromising on the resource quality to fill the gaps.

    2. Going above and beyond to fill talent gaps

    The onshore, offshore and nearshore markets could provide more diversity in IT skills and expertise your company needs, depending on your location. With staff augmentation services, you can access a broader universal talent pool, including from regions acknowledged for having the finest IT talents, such as Europe and Asia.

    Building external teams to bridge the talent gap using staff augmentation services can also help you save the time and cost of setting up dedicated workspaces and recruiting highly-skilled teams.

    3. Increasing cyber attacks

    As businesses switch to fully remote and hybrid working models, they become prone to cyber-attacks and data breaches. According to Statista, the data breaches in the third quarter of 2022 were at the all-time highest, with businesses reporting approximately 15 million data breaches.

    Although businesses are now setting up dedicated networking teams to safeguard confidential information from hackers and intruders, not all of them can afford it. Thus, they eventually recruit network engineers via an augmented staffing model to stay protected from potential cyber threats and data breaches.

    Related: 4 Best Practices When Choosing a Staffing Agency

    Final thoughts

    Using staff augmentation to address the talent gaps instead of outsourcing or managed services models let business owners keep the charge of the project. As a business owner, you get to choose the talent you deem fit for the role and maintain authority over the project to get things done your way.

    With staffing services, you not only eliminate the recruitment time and cost but also access a global talent of highly-skilled developers and engineers to work alongside your in-house teams to optimize overall competencies and boost productivity.

    [ad_2]

    Asim Rais Siddiqui

    Source link

  • Is Your Hybrid Model Working? Use These Success Metrics to Find Out.

    Is Your Hybrid Model Working? Use These Success Metrics to Find Out.

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    With 74% of U.S. companies transitioning to a permanent hybrid model, leaders are turning their attention to measuring the success of their hybrid work model. That’s because there’s a single traditional office-centric model of Monday to Friday, 9 to 5 in the office, but there are many ways to do hybrid work. Moreover, what works well for one company’s culture and working style may not work well elsewhere, even within the same industry. So how should a leader evaluate whether the model they adopted is optimal for their company’s needs — or whether those needs require refinement?

    The first step involves establishing clear success metrics. Unfortunately, relatively few companies measure important aspects of the hybrid work transition. For example, a new report from Omdia suggests that 54% of organizations find that productivity improved from adopting a more hybrid working style, but only 22% of organizations established metrics to quantify productivity improvements from hybrid work.

    Related: They Say Remote Work Is Bad For Employees, But Most Research Suggests Otherwise — A Behavioral Economist Explains.

    Hybrid work is a strategic decision

    From my experience helping 21 organizations transition to hybrid work, it’s important for the whole C-suite to be actively involved in formulating the metrics and for the board to approve them. Too often, busy executives feel the natural inclination to throw it in HR’s lap and have them figure it out.

    That’s a mistake. A transition to a permanent hybrid work model requires attention and care at the highest levels of an organization. Otherwise, the C-suite will not be coordinated and fail to get on the same page about what counts as “success” in hybrid work and find themselves in a mess six months after their hybrid work transition.

    It’s a best practice for the C-suite to determine the metrics at an offsite where they can distance themselves from the day-to-day bustle and make long-term strategic choices. Prior to the offsite, it’s valuable to get initial internal metrics, including getting a baseline of quantitative and objective measures. While there are plenty of external metrics on hybrid work, each company has a unique culture, systems and processes and talent.

    Which success metrics matter in the hybrid work transition?

    Based on the experience of my clients, companies focus on a variety of success metrics, each of which may be more or less important. Each of these metrics should be measured before establishing a permanent hybrid work policy, to get a baseline. Then, the metrics need to be evaluated every quarter, to evaluate the impact of refinements to the hybrid work policy.

    Retention offers a clear-to-measure hard success metric, one both quantitative and objective. A related metric, recruitment, is a softer metric: it’s harder to measure and more qualitative in nature. External benchmarks definitely indicate offering more remote work facilitates both retention and recruitment.

    Thus, if the C-suite chooses to adopt a more flexible policy, I recommend my clients put it on their website’s “Join Us” page, as did one of my clients, the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute. HR will inevitably find they get an uptick in inquiries from job applicants referencing this policy, as well as, potential hires showing enthusiasm for it in interviews. That enthusiasm is something that can be measured.

    A key metric, performance, may be harder or easier to measure depending on the nature of the work. For instance, a study published in the National Bureau of Economic Review reported on a randomized control trial comparing the performance of software engineers assigned to a hybrid schedule vs. an office-centric schedule. Engineers who worked in a hybrid model wrote 8% more code over a six-month period. If there is no option to have such clear performance measurement, use regular weekly assessments of performance from supervisors.

    Collaboration and innovation are critical metrics for effective team performance, but measuring them isn’t easy. Evaluating them requires relying on more qualitative assessments from team leaders and team members. Moreover, by training teams in effective hybrid innovation and collaboration techniques, you can improve these metrics.

    Several hard-to-measure metrics are important for an organization’s culture and talent management: morale, engagement, well-being, happiness, burnout, intent to leave and quiet quitting. Getting at these metrics requires the use of more qualitative and subjective approaches, such as customized surveys specifically adapted to hybrid and remote work policies. As part of doing the survey, it’s helpful to ask respondents to opt into participating in focus groups around these issues. Then, in the focus groups, you can dig deeper into the survey questions and get at people’s underlying feelings and motivations.

    One way to measure the wellbeing and burnout of your employees involves a hard metric: employees taking sick days. By measuring how that changes over time — seasonally adjusted — you can evaluate the impact of your policies on employee mental and physical health.

    Related: You Should Let Your Team Decide Their Approach to Hybrid Work. A Behavioral Economist Explains Why and How You Should Do It.

    Diversity, equity and inclusion represent an often overlooked but critically important metric impacted by hybrid work. We know that underrepresented groups strongly prefer more remote work. Thus, my clients who chose to have a mostly office-centric schedule had to invest substantial resources into boosting their DEI to compensate for the inevitable loss of underrepresented talent.

    Measuring DEI is quite easy and objective: look at the retention of underrepresented rank-and-file staff and leaders as the hybrid work strategy gets implemented. Also, make sure that your surveys allow staff to self-identify relevant demographic categories so that you can measure DEI as it relates to engagement, morale, and so on.

    Last, but far from least, my clients also consider professional and leadership development and onboarding and integration of junior team members. A Conference Board survey finds 58% of employees would leave without adequate professional development, and that applies even more so to underrepresented groups. Leadership development is critical to the long-term continuity of any company. And onboarding and integration of junior staff is a fundamental need for success. Yet most companies struggle with figuring out how to do these well in a hybrid setting.

    Measuring professional development is best done through more subjective tools, such as surveys and focus groups. You can also assess how much staff improve in the areas where they received professional development and compare in-person vs. remote modalities of delivering learning. Evaluating leadership development is easier and more quantitative and objective. Assess how well your newly-promoted leaders succeed based on performance evaluations and 360-degree reviews. Onboarding and integrating new staff involves performance evaluations by supervisors and measurements of their productivity.

    Conclusion

    Once you have the baseline data from these diverse metrics, at the offsite the C-suite needs to determine which metrics matter most to your organization. Choose the top three to five metrics, and weigh their importance relative to each other. Using these metrics, the C-suite can then decide on a course of action on hybrid work that would best optimize for their desired outcomes. Next, determine a plan of action to implement this new policy, including using appropriate metrics to measure success. As you implement the policy, if you find the metrics aren’t as good as you’d like, revise the policy and see how that revision impacts your metrics. Likewise, consider running experiments to compare alternative versions of the hybrid policy. For instance, you can have one day a week in the office in one location and two days in another, and assess how that impacts your metrics. Reassess and revise your approach once a month for the first three months, and then once a quarter going forward. By adopting this approach, my clients found they can most effectively reach the metrics they set out for their permanent hybrid model.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • Let Your Team Decide Their Approach to Hybrid Work. Here’s Why and How.

    Let Your Team Decide Their Approach to Hybrid Work. Here’s Why and How.

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    A November 2022 survey by Gallup finds that 46% of hybrid employees report being engaged at work when their team determines their hybrid work policy of when to come to the office. By contrast, if employees are free to determine their own approach, only 41% report being engaged. If the leadership determines the top-down policy for everyone, only 35% are engaged, and if it’s their direct supervisor, 32% are engaged.

    It makes sense when you think about it. Team members know best what they need in order to collaborate and socialize together effectively. After all, the only useful function of the office is to facilitate collaboration, socialization and mentoring: people are much more productive in their individual tasks at home. So it makes all the sense in the world for the rank-and-file teams to determine what works best for their needs.

    Yet the Gallup survey shows only 13% of employees say that their team determines their approach to hybrid work. That’s unfortunate and undermines engagement among hybrid workers. And it’s easy to fix.

    From my experience helping 21 companies figure out their hybrid and remote work arrangements, the best practice is for the leadership to provide broad but flexible guidelines for the whole company. Then, let teams of rank-and-file employees determine what works best for them.

    Related: So Your Employees Don’t Want to Come Back to the Office. Here’s How to Create Purpose and Culture in Remote Teams

    Empower each team leader to determine, in consultation with their team members, how each team should function. The choice should be driven by the goals and collaborative capacities of each team rather than the personal preferences of the team leader. The top leadership should encourage team leaders to permit, wherever possible, team members who desire to do so to work remotely.

    To set the stage, first, conduct an anonymous survey of your staff on their preferences for remote work. All companies are different, and you want to know about your staff in particular. More importantly, employees want to feel that they have input on major company decisions. That applies especially to policies concerning working conditions. You’ll get a lot more buy-in, even from staff who may be unhappy with your final policies, if they feel consulted and heard.

    As part of the survey, have respondents indicate who their team leader is: that keeps the survey answers anonymous, but can be provided to team leaders to help them understand the desires of their teams.

    The reason it’s important to ask this in the surveys is that many lower-level supervisors feel a personal discomfort with work from home. They feel a loss of control if they can’t see their staff and are eager to get back to their previous mode of supervising.

    That’s why there’s a low level of engagement when team leads are given sole discretion to make the decisions. You need to have team leaders understand what are the actual preferences of their team members without any team member feeling inhibited by giving their team leader undesirable information.

    While you may choose to ask a variety of questions, be sure to find out about their desire for frequency of work in the office. Here’s a good way to phrase it:

    Which of these would be your preferred working style going forward?

    • A) Fully remote, coming in once a quarter for a team-building retreat
    • B) 1 day a week in the office, the rest at home
    • C) 2 days a week in the office
    • D) 3 days a week in the office
    • E) 4 days a week in the office
    • F) Full-time in the office

    In all the companies where I consulted, there were never more than a quarter who wanted to go back to the office full-time. In fact, one company with over 3,000 employees had 61% of its staff express a desire for fully remote work. And it wasn’t even a tech company.

    In the highly probable case that your results aren’t too different from the typical company, you’ll want to follow the lead of the companies I helped. Namely, you’ll institute a hybrid-first model, with some flexibility for employees who want to work remotely full-time and whose roles permit them to do so.

    Next, make sure that team leaders justify the time their team needs to be in the office. That justification should stem from the kind of activities done by the team. Team members should be free to do their independent tasks wherever they want. By contrast, many — not all — collaborative tasks are best done in person.

    Related: 3 Ways to Empower Everyone to Lead (and How to Do It)

    Team leaders should evaluate the proportion of individual versus collaborative tasks done by their teams. Then, they should use that proportion as a basis for a discussion with the team to determine the frequency of when team members come to the office. And it should be a consensus-based decision-making process, informed by the surveys, with a focus on collaboration, socialization and mentoring. All team members should come to the office on the same days of the week to facilitate collaboration.

    What if team members wish to be fully remote and have a team leader who doesn’t want any remote team members? If this team member can demonstrate high effectiveness and productivity, and if their tasks are mostly individual — 80% or more — the team leader should allow them to work remotely. That team member should only come to the office once a quarter for a team-building retreat.

    However, if the team member needs to collaborate intensely with their team, they might not be able to fulfill that aspect of their role effectively if everyone else is in the office. In that case, they need to either come into the office at least once a week. Alternatively, they might consider finding a new team with a more accommodating team leader. Or they might adjust their role on the team to take on largely-individual tasks.

    There should be a very good reason if the team leader desires more than two days in the office per week. Such reasons exist.

    For example, in one company for which I consulted, the sales teams who placed outbound sales calls decided to do full-time office work. The team leaders argued persuasively that sales staff benefited greatly from being surrounded by other sales staff during outbound calls. Such calls are draining and sap motivation. Being surrounded by others on the sales floor making similar calls boosts motivation and energy. Moreover, hearing others make calls offers an opportunity to learn from their successful techniques, which is difficult to arrange in telework settings. However, such exceptions are rare.

    Generally speaking, no more than 5% of your staff should be forced to be in the office full-time. Surveys show that about 80% of workers who are capable of working remotely expect to do so. Employers indicate they will continue offering a variety of hybrid work options. Yet many are unsure about how to implement this model effectively.

    For maximizing employee engagement, while also facilitating team collaboration, the best practice involves having teams make the decisions. This team-led model will ensure that team members can collaborate most effectively. Using this technique will enable you to seize a competitive advantage in the return to the office.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • How To Invite Your Employees Back To The Office

    How To Invite Your Employees Back To The Office

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    It was easy to go home because we had to. Now, how do we get people to want to come back?

    In 2019, less than 6% of American workers worked primarily from home. Then COVID hit, and by May 2020, 35% of workers worked completely remotely, as high as 57% among professional and management occupations.

    Now, business leaders want people back in the office. Without in-person workplace interactions, leaders see workers missing out on building vital connections that facilitate collaboration and innovation and the soft skills gained by interacting with people at various levels within the company.

    But according to Pew research, 61% of remote workers say they work from home because they prefer to. Among knowledge workers unsatisfied with their current workplace flexibility, 71% said they were open to finding another job in the oncoming year. Demanding workers come back will drive quit rates and turn off new talent.

    The best way to bring workers back to the office is by inviting them and making it an inviting place where people want and need to be.

    Related: Should You Bring Employees Back to the Office?

    Social engagement is a good start.

    A 2022 workplace trends survey found that 77% of responding organizations had adopted a hybrid model and most employed an “at-will” policy of office attendance. To encourage people to return, 88 % use incentives to draw people to the office, including exaggerated efforts, like Microsoft’s beer and wine tastings, Qualcomm’s group fitness classes and Google’s private concert featuring Lizzo.

    Many companies have made similar, less extravagant, efforts to lure people back with promises of food and social activities, which is a great place to start. According to the 2022 Microsoft Work Trend Index, 85% of employees said rebuilding team bonds would motivate them to return to the office. Other 2022 surveys also found face-to-face collaboration and socialization as the top draws of office time.

    As we come back from nearly two years of working outside of the office, a focus on building social capital is important, but the office can’t be all about parties. The benefits of improved collaboration and innovation come from a healthy culture where people are free to bring themselves to work. Socialization can get that ball rolling and be a significant draw to get people back to the office, but more efforts are needed to make it a necessary place to work.

    Related: The Case For Going Back To The Office

    Build an inviting space

    Invest in creating a physical environment conducive to a hybrid world where people need and want to be to get their best work done. Renovate office spaces to fit evolving intentions. In an Envoy workplace survey of 800 workers, 61% said their companies had changed their physical workplace to accommodate a hybrid model. Leaders at Marriot, Capital One and Spotify are prioritizing comfortability, communal spaces and more conference rooms for collaboration and dialogue.

    People don’t come back to the office to work in a cube. They come back to sit together and work with others in ways that Zoom is less effective. At Clearfield, we are creating the image of what we want our home base mothership (and we do call it the “mothership”) office to become in this hybrid world, starting with significant renovations. We kept the bright, open, well-lit space, and we did away with most of the aisles of cube farms. We built conference rooms and a lot of training spaces.

    Related: It Might be a Company-Ending Mistake to Go Back to the Office

    Invite them to learn more and grow

    In our shift to hybrid, one of our strongest considerations is a focus on training. By building dedicated training rooms, we support internal growth opportunities, incentivizing people to be at the office to gain more knowledge and grow. It also introduces social opportunities to hold recognition ceremonies at the office as people are promoted.

    Interaction among our sales organization had typically been with customers, not one another, so when we got sent home, they felt the benefits of working remotely full-time. But as we grew larger and started to train and promote people from within, the salespeople who became leads and supervisors suddenly realized the need to bring in their teams and train. From the leadership position of a growing company, it becomes easier to see what makes coming together to learn and advance so critical.

    Attract people to the office with training and opportunities to do their jobs better, and let them see room for growth within the company. I believe people want to do their jobs well and want access to information that could help them do that. Our new office training rooms give employees access to resources to improve their hard and soft skills. We’re also investing in a learning management system to help track all of our training opportunities and to get them out to more of our employees.

    Invite with expectations

    Invite people back, but with expectations. Some leaders enter into a hybrid or work-from-home model and remain unclear in their expectations. They want people in the office but let team members’ level of “hybrid” be user-led. The trend of companies allowing unlimited PTO, for example, will enable people to define the total time they take off individually. Still, unless everyone really believes they can and should be allowed to take six or seven weeks of vacation, they would probably never attempt to test those boundaries. Without expectations, so much autonomy exists in a cloud of uncertainty.

    Leaders should also set expectations around meetings and schedule them with intention. Our design engineers lead our product innovation programs and typically host weekly product reviews, but after COVID, we had to start doing them over Zoom. Once we could, these meetings were the first thing we brought back. Lead engineers needed their peers to touch the prototypes and experience them first-hand with a full range of senses, including the sixth sense — intuition — that got lost over a Zoom call.

    Inviting people back to the office is much more powerful than demanding that they come back, but that invitation needs to come with more than free food and parties — it should come with planning and clear expectations. Turn the office into a place where people want and need to go and draw them there in ways that encourage them to be more productive.

    [ad_2]

    Cheri Beranek

    Source link

  • Viral TikTok Proves No One Wants To Go Back to the Office

    Viral TikTok Proves No One Wants To Go Back to the Office

    [ad_1]

    Friday night employee events were bad news even in the best of times. But nearly three years into a pandemic with a workforce that’s gone hybrid, they’re even worse.

    One TikToker said she showed up to work IRL and for drinks — and no one was there, per The Daily Dot — not even virtually.

    “Not even the HR manager who [organized] it came in,” she wrote in the caption.

    The video shows TikToker @kawaiiprincessv looking at an invitation for “Barefoot Fridays I Office Drinks,” from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    “Come back into the office for the culture,” the TikToker wrote as text on top of the video, implying an employer or leader had said something of the sort.

    @kawaiiprincessv Not even the HR manager who organised it came in #officehumor #backtooffice #officeculture #officelife ♬ Dont Worry Be Hurt – There I Ruined It

    Then, they showed the time, 4:47 p.m. “The culture,” she wrote over the video — with a shot of the empty office.

    The TikTok was posted around 3 a.m. EST. The video showed a call-in with an Australian number, potentially indicating that this is where the creator or company is based. That would put the time of the TikTok’s posting at about 6 p.m. Melbourne time.

    Two people even responded to the event as virtual attendees.

    “Can confirm, the 2 virtuals didn’t show. Must’ve got stuck in traffic or something,” the author joked in the comments.

    “I can drink at 430 at home (and I do) without worrying about my ride home,” another person commented.

    As work has re-arranged itself for the laptop set post-pandemic, companies have debated endlessly about hybrid versus in-person versus fully remote. Some have tried to convince employees to come back to the office with perks or to collaborate more, to the derision or anger of employees.

    Kastle Systems’ return to office data shows a weekly occupancy rate in 10 U.S. cities, based on average swipe-ins, at 47.4%.

    “Office occupancy held steady again this week, ” the security firm wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Gabrielle Bienasz

    Source link