Last week, I talked with many executives who are asking the question, “what is the workplace impact of COVID-19?”
In the short-term…
- Messaging: Don’t use a “Return to Work” announcement, as we are still working even when remote! Instead, call it “Return to Workplace” (not “Return to Office” as not everyone has an office). For some companies, there is an “us vs. them,” as corporate office remains home and manufacturing plant continues to be at work.
- “Comfort and Caution”: In Texas, the “Stay At Home Order” expired, yet many pastors will keep to their digital Sunday services. At a manufacturer, leaders must know what their employees are comfortable doing, and being cautious for their safety. It is not the office you left…
- Engaging and Flexible: A few companies are surveying their workforce for their “come back to work” preferences. There is a difference between those who are eager to come back to the workplace, and those with kids at home who not only have had school canceled for 3 months, but also have summer camps canceled for the next 3 months. One large company is showing flexibility by offering pro-rated scheduling with full benefits, up to a short-term sabbatical.
- Localization: Most companies strive for a standardized policy for all employees; yet, this pandemic has created more one-off situations that need a localized or even individualized approach to decision making.
- Precautions: Companies are doing staggered returns by business units, block scheduling (red days and blue days, or even and odd), requiring masks and social distancing in their cubical farms, taking temperatures as employees enter the building, adding plexiglass to frequent interactions (front desk, security desk), closing down common areas (break room, water fountains), restricting the number of attendees in a conference room to allow spacing, restricting open space desks that don’t have protective barriers, extensive cleaning of “hoteling” desks, and additional precautions.
In the long-term…
- Measuring Productivity: Companies are looking at the financial implication of working remotely. There are cost savings (e.g., work travel, office space, relocations). The question remains if the workforce is still effective? For one company, instead of measuring “hours on screen” or “number of hours worked,” they are instead focused on the results…“did we deliver?” Only then can we compare remote work vs. office work productivity.
- Work Location: What mix will be the most productive / effective? Can we use remote work to attract a diverse talent pool who does not want to relocate? Can we transfer previous real estate costs to collaborative technology tool investments? Last week, Barclays’ CEO said there will be long-term adjustment to location strategy, as large downtown HQs may no longer be needed.
- Remote Culture: I saw one CEO, comfortable with his company’s remote work productivity, share that he can get 8 hours of work done in 3 hours at home. On the other hand, a CEO who distrusts his virtual workforce, wants “all hands-on deck,” requiring everyone back at the office. Companies have huge culture implications as they consider their permanent state remote work policies. Will older generations be able to get over, “that is not how work is done around here…”?
Will employers or employees lead the demand for change for the future workplace?
