The work-from-home era

Today the issue of getting the home versus office work balance right is a major social and political issue, even more if we discuss its impact on business and CBD (Central Business District) businesses. Twenty years ago, we would not be having this discussion as working from home was generally considered to be for lower-level pricing roles offered to special projects of limited duration.

Technology changed all that within 6 weeks and it was seen as a change for ever. The short-term use of technology associated with the Covid years has been recognized as bringing with it costs to both businesses and staff, let alone the rest of the community.

As our great cities grew around CBD-based employment of large numbers of professional and administrative staff, we not just have this group of tall buildings but large amounts of infrastructure including transport and support networks encompassing retail, accommodation, and catering. The work-from-home revolution has had a huge impact on these members of our downtown community too.

During Covid this balance changed, and people moved away from the great cities of the planet, and we remained functional. Pleased with the technology we had, we attended everything on-line but denied our basic social beings. Employers were pleased to have and keep their staff and had no choice but to accept the change.

The necessity of having staff working from home has largely disappeared. The time is now seen as one to grow staff or get staff with experience who can move up.

Employers setting the rules

Employers are recognizing that there is a lot of synergy and opportunity for staff working together in the office. Today it is much less about ensuring that the staff are working 38 hours a week or not, but rather how effective they are and the synergy they could gain by working with other members of their team.

Clearly in a new world of AI and electronic communications we have the technology to work together but more important is the incidental nature of much training on the job. This training will not occur if we need to book Zoom meetings at mutually convenient times with defined durations.

Much of business is spontaneous, opportunistic and requires immediacy to be involved in the process. For many staff simply being in the office gives them the opportunity to participate in or attend meetings and understand how the business is done and why.

Early on, some of my best experiences were simply being asked to come to a meeting and summarize it. Having produced the summary a couple of hours later my boss would say “these are the following critical issues you missed why they are important for us”.

These encounters also provide new members of a team with an insight into the company and the management's values and priorities.

The Employees who want more are openly saying they are demanding senior people be in the office most of the time and the requirement may be less stringent down the command chain but if you want to go up the ladder you need to be in the office.

Employment is about fair payment and fair treatment at work. The nature of this work is set by the employer and the nature of much of the work is determined by circumstances. The opportunity to work from home has never been offered to the whole workforce as the attendance of staff remains critical to the purpose of their employment.

It is hard to imagine mine workers or security guards, bakers or shop assistants working from home. The employee types which this debate is largely about are found in the towers of our big cities.

The critical issue for these workers is, do they want what the employers are asking for.

Different histories and different employers have long had different expectations. For example, the long hours of work in the office for young lawyers are legendary. The same is said of investment bankers and the employees of the major accounting firms and consultancies. However, the reasons are twofold: 1) long hours are expected and 2) teamwork is fundamental to what they do. There is a financial benefit.

Changes in work

The very way we work is changing. 50 years ago, many large organizations commenced their young graduates with a short spell in the mail room. This was the place where all the business of the company was received, and mail was directed to the party best suited to address it. By seeing and reading the mail the young graduate learned the real business of the organization and the actual doers even if they just drafted the responses.

Technology has changed this in two senses, mail is auto read, and few matters of importance come by post. Most material is automatically sent directly to names or positions. The next is most mail now does not receive a template response or a personalized response but an automated email.

Many of these emails conclude that their reply terminates the discussion. The opportunity to learn by drafting a response for a manager or partner has disappeared too. Equally important, today’s career minded graduates want to get on their career path fast and spending months on training wheels is not part of the deal. Likewise, these new highly paid people need pay their way fast. Today neither employer nor the employee is expecting them to stay from joining until retirement. If employers don’t deliver, the staff will leave. Staff want to learn on projects which add not just experience to them, but which improve their resume.

Getting involved in company shaping projects that become of interest to future employers requires face-to-face time with senior individuals and involves the transfer of knowledge and enthusiasm by being part of the team. Yes, it may involve long hours, taking taxis home as the sun rises, and working on adrenaline while soaking in knowledge - but this is what was signed up for.

This is when new staff members see values in action and the theory begins to make sense. These career advancing moments are occurring less in the Zoom era as senior management used to do things with a select few peers and trusted experienced consultants and staff.

A bit like uni by Zoom, a lot of the experience was not absorbed to become part of the DNA during the Covid years. To overcome this lack of socialization there is a recognized need for future leaders to be working in teams and gain the experience to be future leaders.

Proximity and Teams

Natalia Emanuel et al have recently published “The Power of Proximity: How Working beside Colleagues Affects Training and Productivity”, in Liberty Street Economics published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (18 January 2024). They undertook a study focused on peers working teams, but staff were often on two or more teams and the company had 2 buildings in Silicon Valley. The software engineering company is in the Fortune 500. The company’s main campus is split into two buildings several blocks apart. Teams review each other’s code (peer reviewed work).

They found clear evidence that teams which worked in the same building performed differently to those split across the campus. In practice, teams split across campuses met via online meeting services but teams in the same building had stand-up meetings. The real finding was teams with physical meetings got 22% more comments. They concluded “… sitting near teammates primarily affects feedback received by junior engineers and given by engineers who have been at the firm longer.” The went on to find:

Engineers sitting near teammates receive more feedback partly because they ask more follow-up questions. These additional questions and clarifications highlight how face-to-face interaction complements—rather than substitutes for—online communication. Indeed, our analysis of online feedback likely delivers a lower bound on proximity’s total effect on mentorship insofar as physically sitting together also facilitates face-to-face conversation.

The sad thing for more junior professionals is that their employer’s management see mentoring as essential training. The study found where training cannot be provided “…the firm moved away from hiring very junior engineers toward hiring workers with more training. While this change could be influenced by many factors, it is consistent with the idea that when the firm faces challenges in facilitating proximity, it decides to “buy” talent instead of “build” it. So, in practice they want people who have been trained in the systems of business as well as academically.

The Balance

Today no one is suggesting that all staff should return to working 100% of the time in the office. I believe most managers and leaders appreciate that there are projects, such as writing the first draft of a prospectus, which are best done alone and will a large block of concentration and focus. These projects can often be best done from home. Also, employers need to be flexible around staff member personal circumstances from time to time such as an ill family member or preparing for exams. This too needs to place into the mix. We need promote managers who understand most people need a work-life balance to remain with the organization.

See AND be seen

What even “career” employers are showing is if junior staff are not seen to be growing in a broad sense, they are willing to hire “second-bounce” candidates who have earned their stripes elsewhere.

We are seeing strong anecdotal evidence that absence from the office is seen as not getting the training and giving the firm the social license to hire from outside.

Staff need to understand that employers have reason to promote people they see in the office, and they can see them getting the skilling for leadership roles.

By Paul Raftery, CEO of Projects RH and based in Sydney.

We are happy to receive questions of comments at paul.raftery@projectsrh.com or +61 418 486 015.

Source:

• Emanuel, N.; et al; “The Power of Proximity: How Working beside Colleagues Affects Training and Productivity”, Liberty Street Economics, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 18 January, 2024.
• Meddings, S., & Griffiths, K.,; “PwC UK boss Kevin Ellis says AI means young staff need to be in the office”, The Australian Financial Review, 16 Jan 2024.