Work is What We Do, Not Where We Go.

Work From Home or Work From Office is not an all or nothing premise. We can do both and also work from the local coffee shop or coworking facility. Let’s stop the polarized contention that people either hate working from home or love it.
It doesn’t matter any one individual’s preference. What matters is that, within the boundaries of our business objectives, both management and staff can have a choice.

Most companies are struggling now with how to determine a remote work policy. If your firm is one of them, don’t feel alone. In the latest FL Institute of CFO’s survey, over 70% of firms report that they are in the process of trying to figure it out, while less than 20% have made a decision on how to move forward. Check out the results:

For the firms that have figured it out, we’re seeing customized policies that are each as unique as the product offering of the firm. Some of the common traits:

  • Varied Schedules – No one size fits all staff positions, tenures, or personal work styles
  • Flexible Locations – Workplace based on events, projects, and changing team priorities
  • Departmental Decision Making – Policies set at local department manager level

Here is one inescapable truth: Most knowledge workers can effectively Work From Anywhere.

It is now up to each firm to consider how that understanding will drive their unique company culture, help them to attract and retain staff, and provide them with a competitive advantage.

Work is what we do, not where we go.

Talent: The Era of Flexibility

The talent market is undergoing a seismic shift, fundamentally altering how companies consider attracting, hiring, and retaining skilled employees. This transformation is propelled by a force that has become impossible to ignore: the growing demand among employees for greater workplace flexibility. The pandemic has served as a powerful catalyst, not only revealing the viability of remote work but also igniting a profound preference for flexible work arrangements among the workforce. As the dust settles, a clear picture emerges—flexibility is no longer merely a perk. To cast the widest talent net, offering flexibility has become a necessity.

In a study by Owl Labs, you’ll see both the disconnect and opportunity in the chart below. Most employers are mandating a mostly in-office approach (4 or 5 days per week). Most employees, however, prefer either hybrid or remote work arrangements.

Source: Owl Labs, The Flex Report 2023

This pronounced shift in employee preferences necessitates a significant overhaul in corporate talent strategies. To remain competitive in this new era, businesses must pivot from traditional, location-bound work models to embrace more fluid, flexible working arrangements such as remote or hybrid options. This strategic adaptation opens doors to a broader talent pool, unhindered by the geographical constraints that once narrowed the search for exceptional candidates.

The implications of this shift extend far beyond mere logistics. By incorporating flexibility into their foundational working models, companies gain access to a greater geographic array of talent, bringing together individuals with different backgrounds and perspectives. This diversity is a wellspring of innovation and creativity, driving companies towards heightened problem-solving capabilities and a more robust, resilient organizational structure.

Moreover, embracing flexibility can lead to improved employee satisfaction and retention. When employees are given the autonomy to work in a manner that aligns with their personal and professional needs, they are more likely to feel valued and engaged. This increased job satisfaction translates into higher productivity, lower turnover rates, and a more committed workforce.

In essence, the demand for flexibility is reshaping the talent market, compelling companies to rethink their value propositions to prospective and current employees. Those that respond proactively, viewing flexibility as an integral component of their operational and cultural ethos, are poised to thrive. They will not only succeed in attracting a wider, more diverse talent pool but will also foster an environment where innovation flourishes, paving the way for sustained organizational success in the dynamic world of modern business.

As the competition for top talent intensifies, companies that embrace flexibility will find themselves with a significant competitive advantage. By offering flexible work arrangements, they can differentiate themselves from their competitors and establish a reputation as an employer of choice. This reputation will not only help them attract the best and brightest individuals but also create a positive feedback loop, where satisfied employees become brand ambassadors, further enhancing the company’s ability to attract and retain talent.

The talent market’s evolution towards flexibility is not a passing trend but a fundamental shift in the way we work. Companies that recognize this change and adapt their strategies accordingly will be well-positioned to navigate the challenges and opportunities of the modern business landscape. By embracing flexibility, they will unlock the full potential of their workforce, fostering a culture of innovation, engagement, and success.

Work: What Really Matters?

To decipher the essence of work in today’s world, we find ourselves at a crossroads between tradition and innovation, between age-old practices and the opportunity for digital expansion. It’s an exploration that uncovers not just how we work, but why we work and what ultimately drives us towards fulfillment and success. At the heart of this journey is the acknowledgment that capitalism, for all its imperfections, largely succeeds in aligning the interests of individuals and organizations, predicated on the notion that a balance can indeed be struck—a balance that benefits all.

The crux of thriving democracies worldwide lies not just in their political structures but in the economic underpinnings that drive growth, innovation, and prosperity. At its core, capitalism’s strength comes from its ability to adapt, to find that pivotal balance where both parties—employers and employees—derive benefits that propel them forward.

Henry Ford was a master at identifying and adopting strategies that benefited both workers and the company. He doubled wages, reducing turnover, increasing productivity, and creating a buyer pool for the cars they produced. He cut work hours to eight per day and later established the weekend by reducing the workweek to five days from the customary six. He instituted profit sharing, which encouraged harder work and boosted company performance. Ford’s factories were ahead of their time in terms of cleanliness, safety, and engineering. This symbiotic relationship fosters a culture of responsibility, creativity, and continuous improvement, the very tenets upon which sustainable success in the modern era is built.

Yet, although the Return to Office movement is positioned in the media as an Us vs. Them struggle between management and staff, what truly matters in work transcends the transactional. It touches on the human desire to contribute meaningfully, to innovate, and to connect within a framework where the values, goals, and aspirations of individuals align seamlessly with those of the organizations they serve. How are the stated values of a company demonstrated, and how can they become ingrained in company culture through both words and actions?

As we navigate the complexities of the modern workforce, it becomes increasingly clear that the ‘Ideal Locale’ for conducting work is less about geography and more about creating environments that honor these core human needs. It is in these environments that capitalism finds its most fertile ground, where democracy flourishes, and where work transcends the mundane to become a source of profound satisfaction and growth. These environments can be physical or digital or both.

Recognizing that the essence of work lies not just in the balance of benefits but in the alignment of values and visions is crucial. It is here, in the confluence of individual aspirations and company goals, that work truly matters, shaping not only our professional landscapes but the very fabric of our societies. We will explore how to best support this concept, understanding that every industry, business, and individual is unique.

As we grapple with the evolving nature of work, it is essential to remember that the fundamental principles of a successful work environment remain unchanged. By fostering a culture that values individual contributions, encourages innovation, and aligns personal and company goals, we can create workplaces that not only drive economic growth but also contribute to the overall well-being of our society. In this pursuit, the ‘where’ of work becomes secondary to the ‘why’ and the ‘how,’ as we strive to create a future where work is not just a means to an end, but a fulfilling journey in itself.

Deconstructing Productivity

The controversy surrounding work from home has effectively been about defining work as either a verb, meaning tasks to be done, or a place that you go, such as an office. Certainly, if you look in the dictionary, it is both. For many jobs, the workplace is the only place where a specific task can be accomplished. A surgical center, although technology is working on it, still requires the staff to show up in person. Knowledge workers, on the other hand, perform much of their work with their brains. This tool is relatively portable and can often be deployed in a variety of settings, making transporting it from a comfortable home office to an urban office many miles away not necessarily the most efficient use of that tool. With knowledge work, the measurable result is productivity.

How do we define productivity? In a factory or production setting, it’s work output to paid time units. In office settings, measuring productivity can be a bit more challenging due to the difficulty in assessing output quality and managing staff stress. Most office worker tasks can be measured to some extent, although measuring the quality of knowledge work is not simply done by counting units produced. Additionally, in a factory, the toll on the worker is measured with reported accidents. In an office, the toll is mental and reflected in stress and burnout, which are not always quite so obvious.

This brings us to perception. There has been a disconnect between the unmeasured perception by managers of staff productivity as compared to the employees’ estimation of productivity. The difference between these two is twofold:

1. Employees consider commuting, preparation time, and lifestyle flexibility as a part of the equation, which managers generally do not.

2. Managers often have objectives such as team building and knowledge sharing, which are better accomplished in person and more difficult to quantify, while employees are focused on a task list.

The key to untangling this productivity puzzle is setting aside the debate on where to perform the tasks. It’s about managers and employees sitting down and really talking about what goals need to be accomplished. Managers need to spell out their expectations clearly, including some of the things that happened organically by having everybody huddled together in a single location. As we move into an age filled with AI and improved technologies, we need to rethink the specific tasks that need to be done and translate that into results accomplished. Because technology is advancing so quickly, that doesn’t necessarily translate into a production count of X number of reports processed, as it will be expected that we will all get more efficient and an employee’s production should be increasing exponentially as this technology is applied. Sitting in an office versus doing this work somewhere else doesn’t necessarily help with this calculation.

Managers need to acknowledge the unseen efforts of their team, like those early morning hours spent battling traffic. From a business owner or manager’s perspective, they must realize that for many years, actually since the dawn of the office culture, the burden of showing up at the office and whatever that might entail for the employee was fully their responsibility. So, it’s not reasonable to necessarily expect business executives to do an about-face and become empathetic towards each individual’s particular challenges or life circumstances. From the business owner’s perspective, they agreed to pay a wage for a set amount of hours or to fulfill a job description, and it was the employee’s responsibility to complete that in exchange for the payment.

Now that the “where” of that work has come into question, many employees are expecting to modify the terms of employment. The challenge is, they have a very good point. They can often accomplish the business objectives as well as being in the office from other locations. Part of the issue here is that many business objectives that happened organically by having everybody grouped together, such as business culture, relationships, mentoring, and spontaneous creative results, were never defined. That’s our real core issue here because some of those things are indisputably accomplished best in person.  We also know that many companies have staff that are fully remote and manage that successfully, so it is not impossible, just different.

Employees should feel empowered to voice their thoughts on how to hit targets and boost efficiency, even if that means redefining where and how they work. By embracing both sides of the productivity coin, we can start to build a more nuanced understanding of what it means to be “productive.” It’s not just about the hours spent at the desk but the quality of work produced, wherever that may be.

So, let’s open up the floor, encourage those conversations, and maybe, just maybe, we’ll find that the most productive place is where we feel most inspired, supported, and connected—whether that’s in the office, at home, or somewhere in between.

The Broken Contract: An Executive Perspective

Employees, listen up. When most knowledge work employers and employees originally struck their deal, the terms were clear: show up at the office for a set number of hours, do the work, get paid. It was a straightforward exchange that worked for a century or so, predicated on the mutual understanding that physical presence equated to productivity and commitment.

Now, employees are seeking to renegotiate this pact, driven by the allure of flexibility and the advancements in technology that make remote work not just feasible but often preferable. This shift isn’t trivial; it’s a fundamental reevaluation of the work-life balance and the very essence of what it means to be productive. Not agreeing to return to the office is a fundamental, if sometimes unwritten, breach of this contract.

This push for change, while aligning with modern lifestyles and expectations, challenges the foundational agreement without offering much in return from the employer’s perspective. Employers, who had built their operational strategies around the dynamics of office presence, are now asked to adapt to a dramatically altered landscape.

The core of the issue lies in balancing the original agreement with the evolving needs of the workforce. Yes, many tasks can be effectively completed from anywhere, but the sudden demand to alter the terms introduces complexities, particularly when considering the spontaneous interactions and cultural bonds forged within office walls—elements that are harder to replicate in a remote setting.

Employers are tasked with acknowledging these shifts, recognizing the benefits of flexibility while also weighing the value of in-person collaboration that underpins company culture and team cohesion. Without management systems in place to measure productivity and less tangible goals, executives are left with a sense of loss of control. This is particularly exacerbated when company revenue or profits fall short and the executive is under pressure to fix it.

Finding a middle ground is essential, one that respects the original employment terms while embracing the potential for a more flexible approach. This means open communication, a willingness to adapt, and a shared commitment to maintaining the elements of work that benefit most from physical presence.

The challenge, then, is not just about location but about redefining the contract between employer and employee in a way that honors the past while looking forward to the future of work. This means defining and setting objectives for many of the intangible benefits of togetherness, such as team bonding, transfer of knowledge, collaboration, rapport, and trust.

As we navigate this new landscape, it’s crucial for both employers and employees to approach the conversation with empathy and understanding. Employers must recognize the valid desires of their workforce while employees need to appreciate the challenges faced by their organizations in adapting to this new reality. Only through open dialogue and a commitment to finding mutually beneficial solutions can we hope to forge a new contract that supports the needs of both parties in this evolving world of work.

When Chance Becomes Change

Anyone who has tried to quit a bad habit knows that it is easier said than done. By rote repetition, that action has become ingrained into our neurons, allowing us to perform that action without thinking about the potential negative impacts.

The Monday to Friday 9-5 work schedule, and corresponding management habits, that started with factory operations and were carried over to the office likewise became ingrained in our cultural neurons. Just as with the habits that we all sometimes develop in our personal lives, we develop them in our society without thinking about the potential negative impacts.

After over a century of this workplace rhythm, the universe threw us a curveball. The global pandemic, coupled with rapid technological advancements, acted as twin engines propelling us into an era where the traditional boundaries of work were obliterated. In reality, the technology had existed, and the infrastructure had already been adopted on an enterprise scale. Beginning when Amazon introduced AWS in 2002, companies widely embraced the concept of on-demand computing resources, including virtual machines, storage, and databases, paving the way for wider adoption. The concept of moving operations into the cloud offered advantages in terms of cost-effectiveness, scalability, and agility.

The same potential advantages existed, by the way, for staffing these businesses. However, unlike computing habits, which had only existed for a couple of decades, staffing habits had been developed over a couple of centuries, so we’d never adopted these advancements on an individual scale.

These dual forces have not only accelerated but necessitated the shift towards a productivity-based work culture, transforming our perceptions and the very fabric of how we define work. The stay-at-home and social distancing orders that began with the onset of the pandemic served as a global experiment in workplace practices, challenging the long-held belief that productivity was tethered to the physical office. Businesses worldwide were forced to pivot, virtually overnight, to remote work models. This shift wasn’t just about maintaining operations; it was about survival. In this crucible of necessity, the potential for a different kind of work-life began to crystallize—one that valued outcomes over optics, contribution over the location.

Parallel to the societal upheaval, technological advancements played a pivotal role in making this transition possible and, surprisingly, efficient. Video conferencing, along with other collaborative tools, transformed the idea of a virtual workspace from a makeshift arrangement to a viable, and for many, a preferred alternative. These technologies not only enabled continuity in the face of disruption but also showcased the untapped potential for flexibility, autonomy, and balance in the work-life equation.

Remote work, hybrid, work from home (WFH), flexible work, or whatever we choose to call it, has made an impact, and both individuals and business leaders continue to debate the best strategy. As we peel back the layers on how this experiment has reshaped work, it becomes clear that we’re not just witnessing a temporary adaptation but a profound reimagining of what it means to work, regardless of any one company policy. This reevaluation of work practices suggests a future where the measure of success is not where we work, but how well we work. As we progress through this narrative, remember: the seeds sown by these catalysts of change have the potential to cultivate a work culture that is more inclusive, flexible, and ultimately, more human. This journey through adaptation and innovation is not just about responding to immediate challenges but about envisioning and embracing a new framework for the future of work.

Full Circle

Humans have gone full circle in workplace strategy. In the Great Debate happening in offices across the globe, executives are asking themselves whether they should demand that staff come into the office to work. For many, the speculation of both immediate and long-term societal changes are causing decision-making paralysis. The solution is to make an informed decision about the things that you do know.

The question to ask is not: WHERE should they work?

The question should be: HOW do they work?

In the swirling adventure that is work culture, we’re on the cusp of something big, something that brings us back to our roots while launching us into a world brimming with opportunities for flexibility and efficiency. While this is a global phenomenon, the work strategy history of the United States illustrates it well. We’ve gone through five phases of workplace strategy:

Ideal Locale

The first American settlers were quick to figure this out. They came here with skills: Fishing/Whaling, Farming, Hunting/Trapping, Logging, Mining, and Crafts. The craftspeople located in the towns and villages, the whalers along the coast, and the miners in the bogs of Virginia where iron ore was located. Each trade operated from the Ideal Locale for the work required. There may have been multiple locales, one to produce the product and another to market it, for example.

The Farm

As we moved into the early 1700s, farming became the dominant trade and we moved into the Agrarian era. Life and work revolved around the farm, and the vast majority of the population lived in rural areas. The workday for this population typically started before dawn to care for the animals so that maximum daylight hours were available for fieldwork. Seeding of crops was not asynchronous! In winter, when there were no crops, the focus turned to repairing structures and equipment. Farming also drove migration as settlers sought out additional lands.

The Factory

As the Industrial Revolution gained momentum in the early 1800s, the tranquility of the fields was swapped for the roar of the factories. People left the farms and moved near the factories, clustering in urban areas. The factory model of working fixed hours was adopted, with defined start and end times to the workday. This regimentation of time was a departure from the more flexible schedules of agricultural work and was designed to synchronize the labor force. The concept of scheduled breaks and shifts was integral to factory work to ensure continuous production and dictated by the factory bell. Daylight played little part in factory shifts, which were often 12 hours or longer and six days a week.

The Office

By the 1920s, the number of people working in offices surpassed those working in factories or on farms. The factory culture heavily influenced office settings.  Office workplaces adopted the design common in factories, with clear lines of authority, where managers and supervisors often had separate offices overseeing the work of clerks and typists in larger, open-plan areas. The concept of scheduled breaks and shifts, integral to factory work to ensure continuous production, was also applied in office environments to manage desk capacity and maintain productivity throughout the day.

Ideal Locale

Now, here we are, and we’ve come full circle. We’re back to the Ideal Locale phase, where the ‘where’ of work is all about finding the best spot to get the job done. This isn’t just about nostalgia for the good old days; it’s about seizing the moment to work smarter, not harder.

This journey from then to now isn’t just a history lesson. It’s a wake-up call. We’ve evolved from settlers who worked wherever it made sense, through centuries of change, to arrive right back at a place that values flexibility and efficiency. As we dive into this new era, we’re reminded of the simple genius of working in a way that fits not just the task but the person doing it.

This is about reconnecting with the idea that work doesn’t have to be a place you go, but a thing you do at, well, wherever you do it best. Embracing the Ideal Locale can transform not just where we work but how we feel about work. It’s a return to form, but with a twist that could only happen now. Work is what we do, not where we go.