Is going back to the office still a challenge for companies?

After more than two years of the pandemic, it seems that life is slowly getting back to normal. For a long time, when we still didn't have vaccines, some people talked about a "new normality". Today, it seems that we are getting closer to overcoming this hybrid path of combined remote and face-to-face activities, or directly remote work as a necessary alternative to survive in times of COVID.

<<< Home office vs. in-office work. What modality to choose? >>>

In the current reality in which we have vaccines, a large percentage of the population vaccinated and, to a certain extent, the circulation of the virus controlled, we can affirm that the worst is over and that returning to the office is a matter of time, although it has been shown that the remote modality provides many advantages for both workers and the company itself.

For this reason and because the greatest health danger is in the past, governments are enabling all face-to-face activities prohibited during the pandemic, such as cinemas, theaters, sports stadiums, concerts, schools, and universities, and, as was expected, all or the vast majority of people who worked remotely until last year are returning to the office.

Now, the question we ask ourselves is, is going back to the office still a challenge for companies, taking into account the good results obtained with remote work and the commitment shown by employees? Is it worth going back to pre-pandemic normality or are we ready to take the next step in managing change? In this article, we will try to answer these questions.

CEOs in favor of the office

As soon as face-to-face activities began to resume, the business leaders of this group felt relieved. For this elitist and demanding group, going back to the office is the best and most natural indicator of the situation in their company, from the performance of employees in real-time to personal interactions, whether formal or informal.

The CEOs of the office team value much more the activity within the office, face-to-face teamwork, daily contact, face-to-face meetings, notes on the whiteboard, the control panel visible to the entire office, the machine coffee, the filter coffee, shared lunch, and a long etcetera.

For them, by working remotely, although they gain comfort, privacy, and certain security, they lose leadership, or at least that is how Juan, the CEO of an international company, expressed concern about the lack of informal spaces that operated as a link between their daily work and decision making.

There are extreme cases of business leaders who do not allow another type of work other than face-to-face and let their employees know it under threat of dismissal.

Examples of this white-collar fundamentalism are the CEO of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon, who calls remote work an aberration, and the boss of Morgan Stanley who blurted out to his employees, “If you can go to a restaurant in New York, you can go to the office". Undoubtedly, a prejudiced vision of remote work, reducing it to the category of recreation, and leisure.

Surely, these people never contemplated having to implement remote work in their companies, but the pandemic obliged them to. However, while most of the companies managed to adapt to this modality healthy, the heads of a few were more afraid of losing authority than their workforce.

There is no doubt that face-to-face work has its advantages for activities such as design thinking, brainstorming, or daily interaction, but in activities that require greater concentration, the remote modality is more effective. If these two CEOs perceived it this way, their employees would be more motivated.

<<< The impact of the family in the office >>>

CEOs in favor of remote work

The home office as a result of the pandemic accelerated and modified organizational times. It also accelerated the digitization processes and a dissociation between the employee and the person, which allowed the adaptation to a new dynamic to connect the different work teams, from a closer, empathetic place, beyond working life.

According to Verónica Vatausky, manager of human resources at L'Oréal Argentina, remote work is positive because of the closeness of day-to-day interaction with colleagues from other countries. In addition, virtuality allowed the possibility of accessing training, courses, and diplomas with international institutions.

Fernández Silva, from Mercado Libre, also states that every company must know how to align its business with the needs of people. Therefore, being able to work in a framework of flexibility for collaborators reflects the trust that their leaders are placing in them. If these do not allow their employees to work with freedom and autonomy, trust cannot be built on a solid foundation.

In this sense, since companies must be expert negotiators, they cannot demand greater commitment from employees without granting them something in return, and in most cases, the freedom to choose the type of work is a more desirable benefit than a salary increase.

For Mac Pherson of Globant, well-being is key in all senses: "We believe that we can find a balance between 'offering' our spaces to those who need it and encouraging, provided the conditions are met, respectful return (... ) we no longer have a model that meets all needs. Each person and each home lived and lives this prolonged Covid differently."

In terms of Rafael Bergés, Banco Galicia: “Flexibility is here to stay and companies have to embrace this possibility that is so highly valued by employees. We understand that geographical limits will increasingly occupy a less relevant place. People will choose the companies that are most aligned with their expectations."

What to expect from the return to the office?

A Mckinsey study revealed that the staff of 99 of the 100 companies that participated in a survey worked, before the pandemic, 100% of their time in offices. The landscape changed after the pandemic, given that 90% of companies consider hybrid work combining days at home and days at the office. Only 10% of companies assume that the work will essentially be in the office.

These numbers indicate that a complete return to the office is almost unthinkable or unfeasible after two years of working mostly remotely. Going back to the office permanently and pretending the pandemic never happened is like unlearning a skill we've been developing for a long time. And, even worse, it is forcing workers to make this setback.

Nor does conducting all business activities remotely seem to be the best solution. We have stated it in previous articles and we will say it again now: to find a balance between the advantages of the face-to-face modality and those offered by remote work, the most conciliatory alternative for CEOs and employees is hybrid work.

In this way, they return to the office a couple of days a week and carry out tasks that obtain better results in person, such as design thinking, meetings with customers, or brainstorming; while the rest of the days, employees can continue working from their homes.

This ensures that executives bring their teams together in the office and that employees maintain the flexibility and peace of mind achieved during the pandemic. Undoubtedly, the return to the office is necessary, but it must be adapted to the current circumstances and seek the common good of all the people involved.

<<< Debate: in-office, remote or hybrid? >>>

The return to the office is a topic of debate that has been going on for months since there are vaccines against COVID. However, it is undeniable that there has been a paradigm shift since the pandemic, and in the future, the traditional paradigms that preceded the virus will be left behind. Based on all of the above, it shouldn't be a challenge to return to the office when there is no consensus between bosses and subordinates.

The challenge here is the consensus between the parties through a hybrid modality that guarantees the visibility and control desired by the executives during the face-to-face days; while employees will be able to have a few days to work remotely, freely managing their own time, as long as the objectives are met.

Perhaps the conquest of this freedom would not have been achieved without the appearance of the pandemic, which is why we dare to say that, after all, COVID promoted great positive changes, not in an expected way, but they were positive changes that served to bring down old schemes.