Rethinking the Office Space: Experimenting with the Hybrid Work Model

These are turbulent times, but let’s all agree on just one thing. There can be no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the office space for millions, and it has fundamentally changed our perception of what is possible. As many of us are anxiously anticipating a post-covid reality, we cannot move forward pretending to live in a post-covid era by imposing identical antiquated work-life practices that predate early 2020.

Do you even remember 2019 or 2020? Indeed, the details are tenuous at times. Still, we can all recall how governments, corporations, small businesses, and non-profit organizations alike responded to this unprecedented emergency by requiring their employees to work from home at the heat of the moment. Just like that, professionals from a multitude of industries scrambled to become operational in the name of productivity amid a series of restrictions. As part of our coping mechanism, many of us were disorientated and grieved from the loss of our routines. At the time, we were naively telling ourselves that this was merely a temporary work arrangement that can only last for a couple of weeks or months—at best.

However, what has been temporary is quietly becoming permanent while the virus lingers with humankind. Is this new-normal all bad? I believe the answer is an emphatic “no.” As painful as the nature of change can be, for many people, the virus became an unexpected stimulant that accelerated our innate ability to evolve and adapt to remote work.?Now, we can no longer deny the reality of a flexible hybrid working model that is becoming normalized in many workforces across the globe.

From an employer’s standpoint, the exorbitant cost of leasing sizeable expensive office space in those corporate towers may no longer be a burden. In a recent Gartner poll, 82% of company leaders said they plan to allow employees to flexibly work from home part-of-the-time. Meanwhile, a recent study by Stanford of 16,000 remote workers shows an increase in productivity by 13% compared to in-office settings. Those who work at home were more consistent, and this efficiency was attributed to a convenient and quieter working environment. In other words, to employers, it is economical and efficient, and it meets their bottom line, period.

From the employee’s perspective, who wants to be stuck in traffic during rush hour for hours on end? Who wants to be running from “point A” to “point B” just to take the subway and be packed in like sardines? Instead, some remote workers during the pandemic may have dared to slow down and enjoyed a warm breakfast while their Zoom was on mute. They may have even indulged in a nice “downward-dog” stretch with their pets after stressful meeting calls that will undoubtedly appear uncouth in an office setting. For those who have experienced the boon of working from home, “the cat is out of the bag.” The zeitgeist of our times will be forever altered after the tumultuous nature of the pandemic. People of our times, particularly the young ones, will be remembered for seeking a work-life balance and the right to sustain a healthy mental wellbeing—and this nuanced discourse in society is brewing. A “flexible work-life” balance is no longer a fringe movement, but it is becoming part of our globalized vernacular. The sooner employers recognize the needs and defining spirit of our times, the quicker they can restructure the work culture to attract and keep their most talented in a post-covid world.???

However, we are realists. Before celebrating the hybrid working model, it is necessary to highlight real implications and caveats that ought to be mentioned before organizations and individuals leap into a brave new world. Otherwise, it can arguably be bringing the worst of both worlds. This article acknowledges this sentiment by presenting several suggestions to avoid the accompanying pitfalls of hybridized workforces.

A Tentative Guideline to Brave New World . . .

i) Decentralization: Breaking Traditional Hierarchal Structures

Most institutions’ organizational structure still embraces a traditional centralized, hierarchical arrangement that is highly bureaucratic that often fits with a controlled in-office setting, whereby layers of management can closely observe their employees’ performance. However, the hybrid work model tends to flourish under organizations that are more decentralized and favouring professionals who can flexibly work collaboratively and perform independently. Since many of us were corralled into our homes by a drop-of-a-hat, the traditionally centralized institutions did not have time to adapt their organizational structure to efficiently pivot to a remote or hybridized workforce. For instance, long after the initial lockdowns, many superiors in a centralized organization required long Zoom meetings to control stipulated work tasks from home. If you have been attending lengthy superfluous Zoom meetings first thing in the morning, you know you are in a centralized work environment that is not equipped for the hybrid work model. In turn, burning office hours with centralized headquarters will cause staff to sacrifice productivity during office hours and increase burnout. Thus, making systematic changes to decentralize the organizational structure can inherently guide autonomous behaviours that allow for more innovative work from home. However, here lies the gambit: depending on the industry, how can leadership negotiate efficiency and alignment with remote professionals? The trials and errors will be fascinating.?We suggest immediate project members can become efficient small clusters when they limit frequent in-person communication from all staff levels. By connecting in a virtual "touch-and-go-setting" within the specified cluster, they can efficiently get the job done from home.?

ii) Renewed Boundaries and Etiquette

In a physical office setting, office hours are often clearly mandated, but when kitchen-islands became Zoom rooms, office hours became less visible, and some bad habits emerged. For example, when companies dramatically switched to remote work overnight, staff often disclosed their personal numbers if they did not have immediate access to a virtual private network.?Since time was not clearly demarcated at home compared to an office setting, their mobile was perpetually buzzing as colleagues reached out for work-related purposes in the middle of the night. These innocuous statements often start with “I just have one quick question.” These collective “quick” questions can arguably add to the overall burnout rate. A recent study has shown that managers treat remote staff as if they were on call 24/7 compared to their office counterparts. As industries show interest in transitioning to a hybridized model, organizations need to facilitate strategies to orient staff members to formally develop boundaries between on-and-off hour etiquette. This includes clarifying how overtime can be calculated fairly for those who collected their hours remotely.

iii) Avoiding In-Group/Out-Group Cultures

Teetering on the topic of fairness, in the real world, people who spend more hours at the office are often perceived to be more productive, and they are also the ones who tend to be rewarded by raises and promotions. Social psychology 101 has taught us that they are being seen, and familiar faces are often more liked. This poses a problem when the workplace is adapting to a hybridized working culture. In a recent survey, 64% of managers promoted people they often meet in person instead of remote colleagues even though they were 5% more productive in every category compared to their in-office counterparts.?Unless all-staff members split their hours evenly between in-office and remote work to properly socialize, the hybrid model risks creating two cultural group dynamics: the “in-group” and “out-group” professionals. Suppose the out-group’s performance is not recognized to the same degree as the in-group’s output. In that case, it creates an unspoken hierarchy that can be laced with inefficient office politics that can raise conflict in the organization. Managing two distinct employee experiences will become an arduous nightmare.

iv) The Feminized Out-Group Trap

Let’s face it, it is not unreasonable to assume that the out-group will become highly feminized. After all, women have always been more inclined to find a work-life balance as they often grapple between the career and caregiving roles at home. Given that women have been historically devalued by unequal pay and modest promotion rates, the disparity between remote and in-office workers will likely be exacerbated in a hybrid work model—which can be an alarming trap. Without appropriate organizational policies specifically addressing gendered issues in a hybrid model, it will not be surprising if “unseen” women worked more from home and received less pay and promotional opportunities than they deserve. Meanwhile, in-office spaces can become exceedingly exclusive that continues to seal the legacy of gender equality by perpetuating a male-dominated work culture.??

v) Promoting Connections to Fill the Void

Aside from clearly stipulated mandates to avoid auxiliary working experiences, one of the simple solutions to the problem can be addressed by doing what humans can do best: they need to be social beings and mingle. To foster a sense of identity and loyalty to the organization, social events need to be mandatory. The company can celebrate launching new projects or meeting key milestones to ensure that an entire workforce is physically present in one place. After a couple of years wearing overused sweatpants, somehow the idea of attending formalized events can be welcoming, adding some “zest” in a hybridized working lifestyle. In between the hors d’oeuvres and pleasantries, the unspoken human connection and networking can cultivate a sense of belonging for a strong, cohesive workforce. This requires compulsory scheduling along with company subsidized travels--GitLab’s commitment to improving the employee experience is a fine progressive example.?

Embodying some flexibility and creative thinking is part of the narrative around rethinking work. For instance, when we purse our lips while our handy tech equipment fails, companies may want to resist hiring the “silent geeky IT personnel” who often works in the shadows. In light of isolation from home, the IT department will likely be your first point of contact, and you may want to hire a bright extroverted personality that can handle some “active listening” skills. (Yes, the idea of it gave us a giggle too, but these are the times).

Final Thoughts

We will conclude by positing that the hybrid model has its promises to create a work-life balance for the new age, but it is not for everyone—and that’s okay. For the past century, the office provides boundaries between the personal and professional life. When the pandemic hit, people often experienced having their private lives muddled into their professional space.?In an age when people began distinguishing between “a weekend couch” from a “work couch” or designating one side of the dining table to be “all business,” this cannot be for everyone. For some, the office space can be a sanctuary for those who feel safe, engaged, connected, respected, and free. Rethinking work can stir uncomfortable cognitive dissonance for some.??

Nonetheless, no matter who you are, the rats from the pre-covid rat race had time to “think” and re-evaluate what works for them moving forward. And believe it or not, the current pandemic will come to an end—spring always follows winter, albeit a long one. Indeed, many uncertainties and reservations await us as we collectively move toward a post-covid era, but we can be sure that the world has changed a notch. The narrative around the many office spaces is not going to be precisely the same now that we have an opportunity to identify alternative possibilities along with the inefficiencies and toll of the past.?It is unquestionably a reckoning moment. Embrace it.

?

?

?