One size does not fit all. Neither when remote working

What is the best balance between remote and on-site work? Is the best option 3 mandatory days in the office as Apple communicated and generated dissatisfaction and resignations? 100% Remote for an indefinite period of time as Basecamp does and in spite of what had serious incidents this year? Leaving each person free to choose? Going back to full on-site work?

As a CEO I have thought a lot about this topic, we have passionately discussed it on the Board, exchanged ideas with colleagues from other companies, listened to the opinions of my MBA students, read quite a few academic articles...

Why do I consider so important this topic? Simply, I'm convinced that it is a transformational change in the way knowledge workers perform their tasks. There will be no turning back.

In this brief article, I present some relevant facts (not all, it would be endless), but 100% based on my practical experience in Flokzu and INTEGRADOC (companies that produce world-class software for digitization of business processes and workflows).?

The invisible advantages of remote working

Much was said about the obvious advantages of remote working. The savings in commuting time, lunching with the family, time flexibility, savings in transportation costs. And they are all true. But in this line of thought, I'd like to add others, which I find also important, and are not so obvious.?

Creativity

Creative processes in people occur in different ways. There is agreement that the change of context is an instrument that facilitates creative processes. It is not in vain that advertising agencies historically provided their creatives with unconstrained spaces. As we know, the complex problems of any company require solutions with a dose of creativity.

The post-pandemic scenario presents us with a unique opportunity to offer all knowledge workers this tool.?

How many hours can you work in your garden, on a wood bank, enjoying the sun? Very few. How many ideas can emerge in this change of context? Several. And some very good ones.?

Concentration

Complex problems require concentration. A Software Engineer designing an algorithm or trying to find an elusive bug requires a very high level of concentration. And when someone "taps him on the shoulder", it takes him out of that "High Concentration Zone". It can take several minutes to return, to put the whole context back into place, and to resume deep thoughts. Exactly the same happens to a lawyer studying a complex contract, an accountant analyzing an annual balance sheet, or a logistics operator trying to put the puzzle of a large operation together. Again, remote work presents us with a unique opportunity to offer our people the chance to have uninterrupted spaces of high concentration and focus.?

You love to help, but how often do you need a few hours of total, uninterrupted concentration? Several times a week, especially for really complex tasks.?

Productivity

As a corollary to the previous, we see that remote work can provide substantial productivity gains. Some analysts claim that working from home maintained productivity; others that it increased. For very few, it declined.?

In my personal experience, I have seen in some people a tremendously positive impact on their productivity. Especially in those friendly experts in their field, who by their nature were constantly interrupted with questions.?

The disadvantages of remote working

A lot has also been said about the disadvantages of remote working. In my concrete experience, there are three major groups of disadvantages, which are really relevant in comparison to face-to-face work.?

Lack of feeling of belonging (team-building)

Human beings are social by nature. In a 100% remote environment this socialization is less deep than in a face-to-face environment. This generates a lesser sense of belonging and cohesion in the teams.?

In most teams, this is a problem. Team members are less willing to help each other to solve problems or challenges. Members are more willing to quit jobs since they don't feel like an important part of the team, their contribution is not evident, or the relationship with their peers, bosses, and subordinates is colder.?

This effect can be seen much better in teams that have been formed 100% remotely (never worked face-to-face together). The difference in cohesion with teams that shared office, laughter, anger, sadness, and achievements is evident.?

Poorer discussions on complex topics.

Thinking about a new product that the company could market? Planning a large software development project? Defining a new legal structure to create a holding of several companies? These are just a few examples of very complex tasks, which require a deep, committed, and creative discussion among several professionals.?

Of course, these discussions can be held via videoconference. And you can draw on a virtual whiteboard. And share a screen. And raise your hand to speak... Of course, all of this is possible. Just as clearly as the depth and richness of that discussion will not be the maximum of which the professionals involved are capable. We will be wasting part of the richness, experience, and ideas of our team. Worst of all, we will be reaching a suboptimal solution.?

Personal feedback and mentoring

A fundamental aspect for the professional development of every professional is to get feedback from his or her boss, but also from colleagues and subordinates. Part of that feedback is given formally, through a note or an explicit conversation. But another part of that feedback is given informally, either in non-scheduled meetings, small punctual suggestions when discussing an issue and even with gestural language.?

The formal part of feedback and mentoring can be given remotely. But all the other, informal, and often much richer part is lost.?

No less important is the fact of how to give negative feedback. How to tell someone what went wrong, in the spirit of making them improve and grow. If this is very difficult to do face to face, it is even more virtually. The true leader who cares about his team perceives the other person's language when he gives negative feedback and reacts accordingly. He can soften his message, give examples, propose concrete actions. In a complex communication like this, a lot of information is lost when it is done remotely, significantly reducing the value of that feedback or mentoring.?

One size does not fit all, even in remote working.

Ok, got it, remote working has advantages and disadvantages. Final sentence? No.?The most important conclusion is missing.?

Those advantages and disadvantages depend on each individual. Not all advantages are for everyone, not all disadvantages discourage everyone. The reality is much more complex. And this is the point that is sometimes difficult to understand and accept at the organizational level.?

We come from a "one-size-fits-all" work model. We all went to the office every day. We all worked (more or less) the same hours. We all wore roughly the same dress etiquette.?

Surely there were people who didn't feel comfortable with these one-size-fits-all rules. Perhaps someone who needed to concentrate suffered from being constantly "tapped on the shoulder" for questions, but didn't know how to avoid it without being rude. Perhaps those who needed a change of context for a while to clear their heads and come back with creative ideas could not find that space in the office. The experience of remote work showed us that it is possible to attend to the particularities of each person.?

All the people following all the same rules does not seem to add up to much, but rather to subtract from performance, especially when it comes to people working with their knowledge.

The main learning from remote work is that we can accept and take advantage of the differences of each individual, to get the most out of each one in all dimensions.?

Then, why try to establish a unique, common, and mandatory remote-working policy for the whole organization? Wouldn't we be replicating the previous model, in which no difference between people is considered? It would seem that a rigid scheme that ignores individualities is maintained, only that it adopts some days at home and others at the office.?

You may ask, is it possible to have a different policy for each employee? Well, no, of course not. What is possible is to have a flexible policy for all employees, that takes advantage of the best of both worlds.?

Each organization will find its own formula; I don't believe in magic recipes, just as I don't believe that one size fits all. That being said, and just as a concrete example that hopefully will be useful, I share the policy we are following in Flokzu and INTEGRADOC, with employees geographically distributed in several countries and time zones, balancing the best of both worlds (virtual and face-to-face), but taking care of individualities:?

• It is suggested that each team go 2 days a week to the office. On these days it is suggested to centralize feedback and mentoring meetings, as well as those requiring in-depth discussions (product design, project planning, etc.). Each team may choose the days.
• Friday is optional, for the whole company and not by teams. This day will encourage communication between members of different teams.?
• This is not mandatory for anyone: each person can raise his or her situation and find the perfect balance, from 100% remote to 100% in the office.
• At our headquarters, collaborative spaces have been created for people who come occasionally. We are also improving and creating new rooms specifically for hybrid meetings (with remote and face-to-face people).?

Thanks for reading, and I hope I've shed some light on finding the perfect fit for your unique organization.