this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
723 points (97.8% liked)

Work Reform

9948 readers
231 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

White-collar workers temporarily enjoyed unprecedented power during the pandemic to decide where and how they worked.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Coordination, mentoring, and culture are intentional.

They are, but you may have issues with keeping up these with full remote, where people don't get all the social cues that they would get in an office.

Hell, listen to a lot of the criticism here. Executives and management are trying to "control" workers instead of blindly following individual productivity measurements, even if those individual productivity metrics may not be good for the company.

You may also have cases where the culture role was given to a senior member that no one longer listens to because there isn't a direct chain of command and the duties aren't made explicit to everyone.

Full remote can work, but I feel like a lot of companies are finding that it isn't working as advertised compared to being in office and there isn't a known way to do so that they can implement. So, they are going back.

[–] jubilationtcornpone 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My main point was that often the idea that things were working just fine when everyone was "in office" is an illusion and nothing more. Companies that are finding that remote work "isn't working" don't know what "working" is or looks like. If they're blindly calling employees back to the office, then they've successfully solved nothing. Other than maybe adding value back to someone's commercial real estate portfolio. They've just convinced themselves and everyone else further up the ladder that everything is fine while squandering vast amounts of talent and institutional knowledge so someone on the top floor doesn't have to ask or answer the question of why their performance metrics are so bad. Don't have to worry about performance metrics when butts in seats is the only metric.

There are organizations out there where the HR department is responsible for curating a high quality workforce and establishing a foundation of culture, including practices, that reflect the organizations principals and values as well as path to integrating that culture with the workforce. These organizations often have good leadership that understands how to successfully leverage a large distributed workforce to achieve measurable goals. The focus is on performance and there is a high degree of trust between different levels in the organization.

Then there companies where the workforce is treated like cattle and HR's role is to just shuffle the paperwork. They don't value their employees and have a highly rule and/or power driven culture.There is a general distrust between the levels of the org. These types of organizations tend to spend vast amounts of resources simply maintaining the bureaucracy instead of actually getting things done. Management perceives this as "productivity" but here again, it's just a big ship going in circles in the middle of the ocean.

There are also a lot of organizations that hover somewhere in between those two examples.

But again, the problem isn't remote work. Remote work works just fine. The problem is poor management, a lack of accountability, culture that fosters distrust and fails to set quantifiable performance goal. An organization like that is certainly prone to accept the bullshit excuse of "RemOtE wOrK iSnT wOrKiNg" rather than trying to find the real source of the problems. Especially since poor leadership is probably problem number one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

The issue may not be "just fine", but which one is showing better results.

And some of the CEO's are communicating why they think that full remote is failing. The Zoom CEO cited that Zoom meetings aren't creating the environment for collaboration that in person meetings are. You can call him a liar, but he is giving a reason why he wants people back in the office.

And I think that this is happening across a lot of companies. It isn't that working in the office is "good", but it is apparently giving better results than the other option within their organization.