THE GREAT RESIGNATION – What’s the debate really around?

THE GREAT RESIGNATION – What’s the debate really around?

Is it real or just a poorly-worded catch phrase?

Unless you’ve been living under a rock or doing an actual decent job of focusing on what’s most important to you in life, you might have heard of the term ‘The Great Resignation’.

If you hear the words “the great resignation”, it conjures up images much like a great migration, but that of people resigning left and right, without necessarily having a place to go to or a plan. We know based on statistics of those who did act somewhat in that manner, that a majority of them regret it and are making their way back into the traditional workforce. However, there are many other factors being lumped in with what the ‘great resignation’ entails that make it more of a misleading term.

Like many of the newer phrases we’ve seen lately, sometimes the words don’t quite capture the actual phenomenon. And sometimes the phenomenon isn’t quite so phenomenal as we think, and more something that has been occurring in many different ways for years.

It’s no exaggeration to say that the coronavirus pandemic drastically changed the formerly accepted ways of working, alone and in collaboration with each other. Virtually overnight we saw those changes come in, at least in workplaces that weren’t already operating as remote-first workplaces.

It appeared to act as a catalyst for people to really discern what’s important to them in their job, workplace and home balance experience. For some, this was more flexibility to work from home or remotely, in order to spend their usual commute time doing something healthy for themselves like getting to the gym, having time to cook healthier meals or spend time with their family. In some cases this was considered such a priority that if their workplace wasn’t able to (or chose not to) accommodate that, they looked elsewhere.

They resigned, but does this make it ‘great’? Or was it an action many were taking prior to the pandemic when a role or workplace didn’t suit what they were looking for, much like if a role didn’t meet their expected or current salary?

Wrapped up in these conversations is also the debate on whether workplaces absolutely should or should not offer remote working options, and linking that to the Great Resignation itself. Really, it should be an entirely separate conversation. Yet, here we are. So let’s speak to it.

Assuming the nature of the work could theoretically be done from home (unlike, for example, where pharmacists are most definitely not permitted to legally dispense from their home), labelling an absolute on a ‘should they or shouldn’t they’ is possibly what led to what anyone might experience as an increase in staff turnover.

The rigidity in placing absolute rules on roles that dismisses the (sometimes newly discovered) needs of employees to feel their healthiest, happiest and most balanced is the undoing of many organisations.

For one, to ABSOLUTELY say everyone should be working from the office risks promoting an ableist culture. The danger of this is perpetuating obstacles that limit those living with disabilities in performing their roles with ease or progressing career-wise due to additional challenges, or even impossibilities, in physically attending the office.

The argument here being that the option to work remotely for roles that are reasonably able to be performed in this way is far more accessible, thus increasing your talent pool when it comes time to fill roles. In a current period of staff and skills shortage, you’ll want to be doing everything you can to increase your options of relevant talent.

Alternatively, to ABSOLUTELY state that everyone should work from home might also dismiss those that simply thrive in having an external office location to go work, and a team to be around that helps them focus and thus perform better. In the case of neurodivergent individuals, it stands to reason that one way or the other can’t be generalised and can only be determined by the needs of the individual.

Where for one person, being in an office under fluorescent lights and ambient office noise might be over-stimulating, for another it might be exactly what they need to focus and feel happy and healthy.

For one person, just having that commute time every now and then to tend to life admin outside of work hours can make all the difference to reducing stress levels (let’s not pretend we all don’t have washing to do that we resent spending our evenings or weekends worrying about).

For another, having the structure of a time and place to be can be the ultimate remover of stress.

If nothing else, even if poorly-phrased, the Great Resignation is a great opportunity to check in with yourself and, if you’re really courageous and forward-thinking, check in with your staff. Genuinely.

Some things to consider:

• What’s important to you? (As an employee)
• What’s important to you? (As a manager/business owner/leader)
• What does working from home or in the office enable you to do that makes you feel ultimately healthier, more satisfied and productive in your role?
• (As a business owner/manager) What is your ‘why’ for having absolute rules regarding these options, and when do they become more of a ‘you’ thing to deal with rather than staff to?
• Do you have a retention plan for your business?

We have a whole podcast episode on this topic! Have a listen here.

Grow Advisors Australia is part of the Talent United (Global) group of companies.