Posted on 08/03/2023 10:38:50 AM PDT by ShadowAce
We’re now finding out the damaging consequences of the mandated return to office. And it’s not a pretty picture. A trio of compelling reports—the Greenhouse Candidate Experience report, the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED), and Unispace’s Returning for Good report—collectively paint a stark picture of this brewing storm.
Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. And almost a third (29%) of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. In other words, employers knew the mandates would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.
Meanwhile, a staggering 76% of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work schedules, according to the Greenhouse report. Moreover, employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22% more likely to consider other options if flexibility comes to an end.
In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.
Flexible work policies have emerged as the ultimate edge in talent acquisition and retention. The Greenhouse, SHED, and Unispace reports, when viewed together, provide compelling evidence to back this assertion.
Greenhouse finds that 42% of candidates would outright reject roles that lack flexibility. In turn, the SHED survey affirms that employees who work from home a few days a week greatly treasure the arrangement.
The Greenhouse report has ranked employees’ priorities as:
In other words, excluding career-centric factors such as pay, security, and promotion, flexible work ranks first in employees’ priorities.
Interestingly, Unispace throws another factor into the mix: choice. According to its report, overall, the top feelings employees revealed they felt toward the office were happy (31%), motivated (30%), and excited (27%). However, all three of these feelings decrease for those with mandated office returns (27%, 26%, and 22%, respectively). In other words, staff members were more open to returning to the office if it was out of choice, rather than forced.
Recently, I was contacted by a regional insurance company with a workforce of around 2,000 employees. The company enforced a return-to-office policy, causing waves of unrest. It soon became evident that its attrition rates were climbing steadily. In line with the Greenhouse report’s findings, most employees would actively seek a new job if flexible work policies were retracted. The underrepresented groups were even more prone to leave, making the situation more daunting.
At that point, the company called me to help as a hybrid work expert who the New York Times has called “the office whisperer.” We worked on adapting the return-to-office plan, switching it from a top-down mandate to a team-driven approach, and focusing on welcoming staff to the office for the sake of collaboration and mentoring. As a result, the company’s attrition rates dropped and the feelings of employees toward the office improved, in line with what the Unispace report suggests.
In another case, a large financial services company began noticing employee turnover despite offering competitive salaries and growth opportunities. Upon running an internal survey, managers realized that aside from better compensation and career advancement opportunities, employees were seeking better flexible work policies. This aligned with the Greenhouse and SHED findings, which ranked flexible work policies as a crucial factor influencing job changes. After consulting with me, they adjusted their policies to be more competitive in offering flexibility.
A late-stage SaaS startup decided to embrace this wave of change. The company worked with me to introduce flexible work policies, and the result was almost immediate: Managers noticed a sharp decrease in employee turnover and an uptick in job applications. Their story echoes the collective message from all three reports: Companies must adapt to flexible work policies or risk being outcompeted by other employers.
As we navigate these shifting landscapes of work, we cannot ignore the human elements at play. Like unseen puppeteers, cognitive biases subtly shape our decisions and perceptions. In the context of flexibility and retention, two cognitive biases come into sharp focus: the status quo bias and anchoring bias.
Imagine a thriving tech startup, successfully operating in a hybrid model during the pandemic. As the world normalized, leadership decided to return to pre-pandemic, in-person work arrangements. However, they faced resistance and an unexpected swell of turnover.
This situation illustrates the potent influence of the status quo bias. This bias, deeply entrenched in our human psyche, inclines us toward maintaining current states or resisting change. Employees, having tasted the fruits of flexible work, felt averse to relinquishing these newfound freedoms.
Consider a large financial institution that enforced a full return to office after the pandemic. Many employees, initially attracted by the brand and pay scale, felt disgruntled. The crux of the problem lies in the anchoring bias, which leads us to heavily rely on the first piece of information offered (the anchor) when making decisions.
When initially joining the company, the employees were primarily concerned with compensation and job security. Once within the fold, the pandemic caused them to shift their focus to work-life balance and flexibility, as confirmed by both the Greenhouse and SHED reports. Unfortunately, the rigid return-to-office policy made these new anchors seem less attainable, resulting in dissatisfaction and an increased propensity to leave.
As we steer our ships through these tumultuous waters, understanding cognitive biases can help illuminate our path. Recognizing and accounting for the status quo and anchoring biases can enable us to create a workplace that not only attracts but also retains its employees in the new age of flexibility. After all, success in the world of business is as much about understanding people as it is about numbers and strategy.
Or are Realtors even employees? Or are they independent contractors?
If they’re too lazy to come to work they don’t even need enough money to buy a car.
May as well hire H1B
One of the attractive aspects of working for my current employer was a dedicated office with a lockable door. I had that onsite. It comes at an "overhead" cost to the customer contract based on square feet. As a 100% remote employee, the customer pays nothing for "overhead". It is reflected in the hourly rates charged for my labor. It adds up to serious money with a team of 25 computer scientists.
When I first hired on, the company was employee owned. We owned our buildings and infrastructure. The company went public in 2007. A decision was made to outsource accounting and stock management. Next, all the real estate was sold to a holding company. The holding company leases back space on a contract by contract basis. The advantage of no longer owning the real estate is the ability to exit an unfavorable business environment quickly. California is feeling the consequences of that choice. Because we are spread out over every state in the union and multiple foreign countries, the payroll vendor has to track labor hours by zip code and pay state income taxes where applicable on the payroll. As employees, that complicates tax time. I've had to file in as many as 4 different states in some years.
The model of leasing back floor space has come in handy with the new working from home model. Less money going to floor space rentals. Some of that savings was reinvested in beefed up company networking. A big win for those working remotely. The VPN can download at 40 Mbps. My fiber optic can move 980 Mbps up/down, so the company VPN is still the limiting factor. Some government customer VPNs are barely capable of move 1 Mbps.
Your #101 - excellent. Brings back some memories!
I worked the corporate world for years. Mentoring and team creativity? Non existent. We all just sat in our offices and worked quietly all day. Office meeting once a month.
Yup.
I’ve been working from home since 2008 and will never go back. I’ve doubled my income during that time as well.
Companies need to take a long hard look at the realities prior to demanding everyone come back to the office. The labor pool locally is a small fraction of what is available nationally. You want someone who meets your qualifications and lives in town or someone who blows them away and lives three states over? The entire reason I was able to make the transition is that I had the skills that weren’t available locally (and the job was in Chicago!).
Of course some people abuse it, but some people also abuse it while in the office.
“I worked the corporate world for years. Mentoring and team creativity? Non existent.”
Yep - but LOTS of talk about it.
Seems like it is sorting itself out on its own.
I always said there are two kinds of managers:
1. Those who talk about stuff.
2. Those who actually do stuff.
Manager type 1 loves meetings—the bigger and longer the better.
Remote work allowed everyone to multitask while manager 1 bloviated.
Interesting. We have manufacturers in my area that offer good pay and benefits which must be working quite well as several hundred employees seem to be doing well. They own a home, boat, and their kids enjoy participation in sports and other activities. If one isn’t happy with their job or paycheck my recommendation is to shop around for something better. Those jobs are out there.
Independent contractors. Most have an office. At least I do with lots of great people. People that have much in common.
Most of such jobs were not locked out or sent home to work.
There is no such thing as RTO for jobs that require in-person attention. Those jobs never were WFH jobs.
My son actually lives in Troy, has for at least 25 years. His biggest problems over the years have been city plows taking out the side-view mirrors on your car every-so-often in the winter. Russell Sage College is down the street, and although there is a large parking lot for students across the street from the brownstone he lives in, the students take up the parking spots on the street that the residents are supposed to use. You can't park in the student parking lot without a sticker, or your car will get towed or ticketed
Also, within the last 6 months, there have been two hit and runs that damaged his car. The first hit and run was a drunk driver who hit multiple cars along the route they took. They hit the back-end of my son's car (VW Tiguan), pushed it up onto the sidewalk. The girl who lives upstairs from him was parked in front of him, and his car was pushed into the back-end of hers. The cops finally caught with up the person that morning.
Then two months ago, he was parked on the side street across from the student parking lot. He thinks it might have been someone pulling out of there that hit him. Less damage on the car this time around, but it cost much more to fix it, despite the first hit and run causing damage to the computer system in the car on top of the body damage. There's parking on both sides of the street he lives on, except for Fridays. On that day, all cars have to be off the street before noon, so they can bring the street sweeper in. If your car is still there, they will tow it. He learned that valuable lesson when he first moved in all those years ago. So basically, he's had more damage done to his cars over the years while they've been sitting outside his building. Never had an accident in all the years he had to drive into Albany.
I've been working remote for about 5 years. You have to be self-motivated to do it. Some folks can't do that, which is OK, because I don't want to work with people you have to beat to get work out of them anyway.
All types of employment currently find a high turnover rate. The job market is hot (for those who know how to embelllish their resume). They work for a few months and move on before anyone discovers they are normal and not superheros.
On the other side HR departments (which have their own turn over problems) are bound by government rules, regulations and fear of them...and fear of ambulance chasing lawyers who can see discrimination everywhere. College graduates fall into 2 categories..
1. They have the ability in IT, engineering, sales, marketing to do a productive job.
2. They took courses in gender studies and similar and are only qualified to work in HR or PR and not in any productive department.
So the employee pool for HR is not the same as the productive parts of the enterprise. They see the other departments thru the prism of their own educations and now new departent.
Notice the article says return to office which means they worked at the office previously
Mr. Yokel, you just described me. Well done.
The internet should have forced this decades ago. This is a 1950's mentality to force people into a central command office. WFH allows for not being accused of offending some other coworker, sexual harassment, stealing office stuff, etc.
WFH is a savior for companies, its a shift from the burden of the employer to the employee. No longer does a company have to spend vast resources in real estate, electricity, taxes, supplies, etc.
The employee is the one who has to cover that end on their side, along with lots of more risk. The employer has all the leverage, they now have the resources at a minimum of the entire US, no longer in a region. It's a no brainier to have WFH, in a sector that allows it.
The 8 hours would include coffee breaks, lunch break and slacking off.
Wfh folks tend to work 8 or more, but not necessarily in a stretch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.