FIR #435: Physical Presence is Not a Collaboration Magic Bullet

When executives justify their return-to-office mandates, they almost universally cite the collaboration and innovation that result from serendipitous encounters between employees. They also point to the need to boost productivity. The problem with these arguments is that the evidence does not support them. In this short midweek FIR episode, Neville and Shel look at one financial services company that has seen eye-popping increases in performance metrics since listening to its employees and adopting a policy that lets employees work where they want. We also review a report on what it actually takes to build connections and collaboration in organizations. Links from this episode: RTO mandates aren’t for everyone. Here’s what we did instead—and it’s working: Synchrony CEO Synchrony’s Rick Hartnack: ‘Remote Work Model Is A Competitive Advantage’ What Employers Get Wrong About How People Connect at Work How to Improve Employee Engagement in the Workplace 5 Strategies To Boost Employee Engagement In The Workplace The next monthly, long-form episode of FIR will drop on Monday, November 25. We host a Communicators Zoom Chat most Thursdays at 1 p.m. ET. To obtain the credentials needed to participate, contact Shel or Neville directly, request them in our Facebook group, or email fircomments@gmail.com. Special thanks to Jay Moonah for the opening and closing music. You can find the stories from which Shel’s FIR content is selected at Shel’s Link Blog. Shel has started a metaverse-focused Flipboard magazine. You can catch up with both co-hosts on Neville’s blog and Shel’s blog. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this podcast are Shel’s and Neville’s and do not reflect the views of their employers and/or clients. Raw transcript: @nevillehobson (00:03) Hi everyone, welcome to episode number 435 of 4 Immediate Release. I’m Neville Hobson. Shel Holtz (00:11) I’m Shel Holtz. I was reading an article the other day by Brian Doubles, the CEO of Synchrony, which is a financial services company that offers consumer finance products. My Chevron gas station credit card is a Synchrony product. Doubles wrote in Fortune that amidst all the CEO calls for employees to return to the office, he’s had no second thoughts maintaining Synchrony’s policy, which I can best sum up as whatever. Want to work from the office? Fine. Work from home? That’s fine too. Wanna be hybrid? You got it. Doubles does ask employees to live close enough to an office that they can get there for occasional meetings, training, and culture events. This policy stemmed from a survey of employees who said they wanted to be able to have work at home as an option and have access to the office from time to time without concern about it threatening their career or being seen as a negative. Now, despite everything we’re hearing from the CEOs who are justifying the return to office mandate, Synchrony, using its approach, has risen to fifth on the Fortune 100 best companies to work for list. That’s up from 51st in 2019. And 95 % of Synchrony employees say it’s a great place to work and that the company’s way of working gives them the flexibility they need. So what’s going on with all of this justification? that other CEOs are providing for their mandates for everybody to come back five days a week. We’re gonna dive into that right after this. In the article he wrote, Doubles explains that what Synchrony did to make this approach work, including making in-person events matter, adopting a coaching culture, supporting career journeys, no matter where the employees are situated, And measuring outcomes versus time in the office are what really drove this success. And by the way, on that last one, Double says the company has seen stronger productivity and business outcomes. Employee turnover is lower. The company has experienced a 30 % increase in job applications. Meanwhile, CEOs everywhere are insisting that having employees in the office produces key benefits. These include enhanced collaboration, the belief that physical proximity leads to spontaneous interactions, brainstorming sessions, and seamless communication. But yeah, spontaneous interactions can occur in an office setting, but the forced nature of return to office mandates have proven to result in employee dissatisfaction and resistance rather than genuine collaboration. They also argue that you get stronger company culture. The idea that shared physical spaces cultivates a unique organizational culture and reinforces company values. And the big one, they believe that you get better productivity when people are in the office. The assumption is that in office work environments minimize distractions and facilitate better oversight leading to higher productivity levels. These, it’s important to point out, are myths. For example, a recent survey found that only one in three executives who imposed return to office mandates saw even a slight positive impact on productivity. Doubles calls this a failure of imagination on the part of leaders everywhere. And while these points have some merit, we really have to examine whether these assumptions hold true in the current work landscape. Recent studies and expert analyses offer a more nuanced perspective. Let’s start with collaboration and connection. There was an article in the Harvard Business Review recently that agrees that in-person work can facilitate spontaneous interactions, but that doesn’t necessarily lead to meaningful collaboration. The quality of interactions rather than their frequency or spontaneity is what truly drives effective teamwork. Next, let’s turn to employee satisfaction and retention. Data from the Great Places to Work organization suggests that Rigid return to office mandates can negatively impact employee satisfaction and retention. Employees who have autonomy over their work environment tend to exhibit higher engagement and are more likely to stay with their organizations. And as for productivity metrics, findings from Gallup reveal that remote workers often match or exceed the productivity levels of their in-office counterparts. The flexibility of remote work can lead to better work-life balance, which in turn enhances overall performance. The fact is, the research finds that meaningful connections develop through intentional engagement, not just physical presence. And while a physical presence coupled with efforts to create meaningful connections can produce these results, careful thought and planning can produce meaningful opportunities for connection and collaboration, regardless of where employees are doing their jobs. Organizations like Synchrony are achieving success by focusing on intentional engagement strategies rather than arbitrary office attendance requirements. Now I raised this issue a few months ago, but it’s worth reiterating in light of this data about what truly drives connection and collaboration. We have to stop acting like remote or hybrid work is temporary. We have to stop using patchwork methods for engaging with employees, for guiding their career aspirations, for managing them and for keeping the culture strong. We have to help our organizations and leaders figure out how to develop practices based on remote and hybrid work being the way business is done in the post-COVID era. Understanding employee preferences is crucial for this kind of success. Surveys indicate that a significant portion of the workforce values the flexibility that remote work offers. For example, a study by Buffer found that 97 % of employees would like to work remotely at least some of the time, indicating a strong preference for the flexibility that remote work provides. And companies that offer flexible work arrangements are more attractive to top talent. Rigid return to office policies could deter potential candidates who prioritize work-life balance and autonomy. Now, this is a podcast about communications and there is a role for internal communicators here. This is an opportunity to help leadership understand that effective collaboration stems from well-designed processes and cultural support, not physical proximity. The key is shifting the conversation from where work happens to how it happens most effectively. @nevillehobson (06:56) It’s a big topic, is it not? It actually what you’ve highlighted, I think, suggests strongly that all those organizations whose leaders are saying to people in demanding their return to the office five days a week are nuts. They don’t understand the way of things. think, listen to what you’re saying, I was saying to myself, if I were working for organization that was that had a policy of coming back to the office. To me, the best way to do this is the hybrid approach. And you mentioned surveys talking about what employees themselves value and what they would like to do, which speaks to that, it seems to me, that you’d like the option to work at home or the office, whatever suits you. And that financial services company you spoke about, that’s their approach in the sense of, know, whatever works. So you work at home or wherever, go to the office when you need to to meet with someone perhaps, or because you feel like going into the office that they just see people. I wouldn’t appeal to me to be working 100 % away from the office. I’d like to go into the office. I think though, the question in my mind is, if this is so, and the arguments are compelling, that the forced return, enforced return to everyone five days a week, the office is not a good thing to do at all. What needs to happen then for those companies? And there are many of them here in the UK as well. I read now and again about such a company is implementing a return to work policy. How do you deal with that? Shel Holtz (08:42) It’s a challenge because I think what’s driving a lot of this is not what the leaders of these organizations are saying is driving it. I think there are some hidden agendas here. I think that there is pressure from governments, for example, to get people back into downtown corridors to support local businesses, the dry cleaners and the bistros and the sundry shops, the 7-Elevens, the Starbucks and the like that have been suffering because people are not working. @nevillehobson (08:54) Yeah. Shel Holtz (09:11) downtown, they’re not coming out during lunch and availing themselves of these services. I think there’s also the leases that these organizations are paying for these buildings that are sitting empty or half empty and some pressure to have people come in and occupy those spaces. I think there are probably some other issues that are driving this. And what you’re hearing is that this whole collaboration and connection thing is this is the excuse that they’re making, even though there isn’t really data to support it. So I think that you need to do is is look at bottom line effectiveness of what’s happening in these organizations that have embraced remote and hybrid as just the way things are now companies like Synchrony and look at what they’re doing in order to make it work. @nevillehobson (09:43) Yeah. Shel Holtz (10:00) I mean, they’ve reconfigured their spaces in the buildings that Synchrony owns to accommodate cultural events and big meetings and get togethers that reinforce the culture without saying you need to be here every day just so you can sit at your desk and do whatever it is that you would have done at home without having to go on that commute. @nevillehobson (10:10) Hmm. Hmm. I was reading as well the Harvard Business Review piece and there’s a really interesting section that speaks to this directly and it sets it out pretty well I think. Let me read this bit. So what might be happening when employers issue return to office mandates? Colleague connection may increase as HBR. because employees are milling about the same office and benefiting from random and serendipitous interactions. But at the same time, leader connection might decrease because employees feel their supervisors don’t understand their motivations or don’t care about the impact of the return to office mandate on their autonomy and their lives. Employer connections can also take a dive as the desire to work hard to see the company succeed is undermined by a feeling of betrayal. And without clear and unambiguous links to why employees need to be back in the office, role connection can be negatively impacted as people believe they’re being evaluated based on their attendance more than their performance. I think that’s absolutely spot on that assessment. And in my view, I think there is that and I and visualize myself in that situation. I would feel the same, I think. And you might also feel that I’m coming to the office because they told me I have to, in which case. that’s not a good start to doing this. And your your own productivity is likely to be heavily impacted because when you’re in the office, under those circumstances, you’re going to be chatting with people, they’re to come up to you and say hi, and you suddenly you’re in that sort of environment, rather than be focused on meeting with someone to pursue a project or do something. I you might do some of those things, but the the the climate, as it were, is not conducive to any of that. of the combination of the fact you have to be there, so that’s why you’re there. The feeling of betrayal. And if there is lack of trust in your manager, the thing is doomed because elsewhere, and indeed, Gallup talks about this, well-skilled managers, the ability to coach their teams experience much greater productivity and all the stuff that goes along with that than teams that don’t have. a manager like that or a supervisor. I don’t see any and it’s interesting what you say, Shell, where think there’s, you know, it’s like governments are interfering with this. I’m sure it’s similar in the US, but here in the UK, you’ve got empty office buildings everywhere and companies are struggling to fill them. They’ve to pay the rents and so forth. So that’s an incentive for them to persuade people to come back to the office. But Most or many of those businesses you talked about, the dry cleaner, the beast, have closed and gone. They’re not there anymore. And so in this country, and this is probably different to the states, I’m sure, that public transport, broadly speaking, in most big cities is potluck, frankly, whether that train is actually going to arrive and get you there on time. the stress is dreadful. hear this all the time from friends of mine who do commute into London in particular, but also Manchester. So all of those things are drivers to make you want to perform well from your home office or go in or is and or go in at a time that isn’t the old traditional rush hour. It’s far more likely that it’s going to be valuable if you do that way. It just seems to me crazy to insist on these mandated returns to offices. It doesn’t make any sense to me. Shel Holtz (13:54) Yeah, mean evaluating people on attendance is ridiculous. The company does not succeed. There’s not a business analyst out there that evaluates the performance of a company or its desirability as an investment based on how many employees show up at the office. Those are not outputs that they’re looking for. There are other things that we hear about that are important to employees. Young employees need to be seen and mentored. But again, I think what we’re doing is… @nevillehobson (13:58) crazy. Thanks Shel Holtz (14:24) looking at this as temporary, so we’re figuring out, well, how do we do this for now until we can get people back in the office and mentor them and coach them the way that we are accustomed to, rather than identifying new means of doing this, which is where we have to go. We have to find ways to make people visible, to have them mentored by various people in the organization, to coach them effectively as a manager when they are working remote or. It can be done. There are organizations like Synchrony that are doing it quite well. Look at the fact that their turnover rate has dropped as a result of this. So I agree with what Mr. Doubles said, the CEO of Synchrony. It’s a failure of imagination on the parts of leaders who say the only way that we can make this work is going back to the way things used to be. Employees have moved on from this. @nevillehobson (14:57) Yeah. Yeah, I think that’s about right. So it’s a leadership issue more than anything else. Yet, I worry that nothing will make this change. And if anything, you can see the pressure increasing for people to go back to the office. Here in the UK, what I’ve seen in mainstream media now and again in the past few months are the calls for this getting stronger and more forceful. It was like insisting this is going to have to be the only way these companies will survive is all the employees that go back to the office. And even this way, I we’ve touched on this sort of area before, but those are the companies that seem to me to have people in roles of power and influence who are adamant that they’re not going to allow working from home anymore. And you got to come to the office. And the unspoken bit to me certainly is so we can control you, we can know what you’re doing, and stop you doing stuff we don’t want you to do. I look at the story that was topical here recently. One of the big banks here, National Westminster Group, issued a statement publicly that picked up a lot of attention that they prohibit employees using WhatsApp. And they’re not allowed to use the communication methods that are unofficial. Translation, we don’t want to use the encrypted messaging apps because we can’t see what you’re saying. Now, it turns out that there was something bigger behind the scenes on this, that this was to do with something happened in the US with companies and employees using third party apps that were very risky. So there was issues surrounding that pressure put on the UK to do the same that led to this, it seems. Yet, that is totally ridiculous, frankly, to do that. But I get it, there are people who don’t get it. And they are in positions of control and organization to make some of these, these edicts out there or put them out there. So in this context, though, this they seem to be getting it wrong completely. And you mentioned some of them. And I think the one that struck me in particular was regarding that financial services company, you mentioned that they have gone up to what 51st. higher even than that is one of the best companies in America to work for. Shel Holtz (17:34) Yeah, they were 51st, now they’re, I think, fifth. So, I mean, that’s quite a dramatic improvement. @nevillehobson (17:37) Right, So in five years, it is. So that’s what other people are saying about them. And so surely, these organizations that are insisting people go back to the office, because that’s the new terms and conditions of your employment, are hitting the sand, it seems to me. I mean, I don’t know what else to draw upon itself, but it doesn’t seem a very good idea to insist on this. Shel Holtz (18:01) No, and I think your top performers who have been forced to come back to the office when they get a call from a recruiter saying, we have a position for you and you can work remote, they’re going to be very inclined to take that. And you’re going to see these companies lose the cream of the crop from their employee populations. And they’re going to be left with mediocre employees who can’t get a job elsewhere and keep coming to the office because they just don’t have a choice. @nevillehobson (18:12) Ha ha ha ha. Yeah. So you mentioned earlier, when you were laying out this this whole situation, an opportunity for community. So what advice would you say or what tips would you give to fellow communicators who are in an organization that is insisting on returning to the office? What could they do to try and influence opinion to change that? Shel Holtz (18:50) Well, I think leaders are motivated by data. So whatever data you can pull together, and I think it’s a combination of what your own employees are saying. Remember, employee voice is a critical component of employee engagement. So elevate that voice and let the leaders know. how employees are feeling and what they’re thinking, and combine that with the fact that, I mean, only one in three CEOs with return to office mandates saw even a little bit of productivity improvement. Meanwhile, the ones that continue to have remote and hybrid are performing quite well from a productivity standpoint. And then you might wanna propose some communication channels or communication activities that… are new to the organization that support the idea of connection and collaboration with a hybrid or a remote workforce that the organization can start to employ on a regular basis or at least experiment with so that we’re not just using something that’s cobbled together to get us through until everybody’s back in the same place. @nevillehobson (20:00) tips. Shel Holtz (20:01) And that’ll be a 30 for this episode of Four Immediate Release. The post FIR #435: Physical Presence is Not a Collaboration Magic Bullet appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.