Unlocking the Office Debate: Assessing the Right Priorities

Over the weekend, as I delved into magazines (yes, I’m old school—I still relish the touch and feel of magazines and physical books!), a concept caught my eye: Gen Z and their engagement in "hush trips" while working as reported by INC Magazine. This entails employees traveling out of town to work from different locations without informing their managers.

Initially, I questioned the term, particularly in a hybrid or remote workplace where such practices are commonplace, unless there are specific location requirements. As long as meetings are attended as scheduled, and work is completed, the need for secrecy seems perplexing.

Research has shown that remote work has become increasingly prevalent, especially among younger generations. A study by Remote Year found that 88% of Gen Z employees prefer flexible work arrangements, reflecting the growing trend of working from different locations.

This led me to ponder the broader conversation around returning to the office and office time. Are we truly focused on the right aspects of this discourse? Drawing from my experiences in environments where working from home wasn’t feasible (e.g., in a college setting) and my current role that is more of a flexible hybrid without a mandated time or day in the office, I understand the nuances.

When reports surface about organizations reevaluating in-office requirements, I refrain from passing judgement. Each organization must adapt to what aligns with its culture. However, I believe we might be directing our attention toward the wrong questions or issues.

One frequently cited factor is productivity. While this may be a valid concern, research by Stanford University suggests that remote work can lead to a 13% increase in productivity. The focus should then shift to whether leaders are making decisions for the entire workforce when, in some cases, performance-related issues should be addressed by individual managers. Are we establishing appropriate expectations and performance monitoring systems that empower employees to excel in their roles? Are we holding team/people leaders accountable for managing their teams?

Moreover, I advocate for in-person collaboration, onboarding, and learning. As a mother of a young adult, I recognize the importance of remote work in early career stages. However, research conducted by Harvard Business Review indicates that while remote work has advantages, there's a significant need for personal interactions to foster creativity and innovation. Mentorship, crucial for younger generations, is traditionally developed through office interactions. Mentorship significantly contributes to career advancement, and we must now explore alternative means of cultivating these relationships. As the proportion of younger generations, who may lack exposure to a conventional office environment, rises, this becomes crucial for both their success and the success of organizations globally.

Lastly, are we creating an inclusive and valued environment for everyone in the workplace? Research from McKinsey & Company highlights that diverse and inclusive teams are more innovative and perform better. This extends beyond planning for staff reporting to the office (if they are part of a hybrid model) and involves continuous investments in professional development. Managers need the skills to lead teams in a dynamic world, fostering a mutually beneficial relationship with employees for sustained high performance.

These musings touch on a few aspects of the topic, but research suggests that a more transparent approach to workplace expectations could lead to a more positive work environment. Instead of resorting to "hush trips," perhaps we need a comprehensive strategy that aligns with the evolving landscape of work, providing clarity and satisfaction for all team members.

What do you think? Sound off in the comments below!