Unlock Editor’s Digest for free
FT editor Roula Khalaf selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Remember the good old days? When office corridors buzzed with the sound of ideas being exchanged between senior executives and younger recruits? And the kitchens! New products conceived in the time it took to boil the kettle. Not to mention all that learning. Back in the day, a new employee only had to sit five metres away from an experienced colleague to absorb the full contents of their brain.
That pre-pandemic nostalgia influenced the vision laid out this week by Andy Jassy, chief executive of retailer Amazon, who ordered a full-time return to the office. In a memo, he said the move would make it easier for staff to “learn, model and practice.” It would also “strengthen our culture” while making things like brainstorming “easier and more effective.”
I don’t want to spoil anyone’s parade, but back in the day (five years ago) employees also complained about silos, lack of training, and productivity. Remember offices on Fridays? No, me neither. And what about meetings outside the office because HQ was too boring to generate new ideas? Sadly, yes.
Of course, meeting in the workplace can spur connections, innovation, and learning. My best gossip usually comes from chance conversations. For some, the commute gives them a boost, but let’s not get carried away. The office isn’t the solution to all work problems.
However, some seem to think that it is, even though that view is not supported by evidence. In his new book, About workBrigid Schulte describes a leadership “echo chamber.” One expert tells her that her team “was actually more productive” when they worked flexibly “not just in terms of hours worked, but literally in terms of results.” They can easily demonstrate this to the CEO, but “they can’t get him to listen because they’re listening to their fellow CEOs instead.” Other bosses flex RTO mandates to show forceful leadership: take Elon Musk, who once described “laptop classes” as “living in Wonderland.”
Who would have thought that something as boring as an office could become the centre of a culture war? But here we are. When UK business minister Jonathan Reynolds said that flexible working Productivity and opportunities could improve this week.Kemi Badenoch, a candidate for the leadership of the opposition Conservative Party, condemned his sentiment.
We go back and forth, distorting statistics, trading insults: the slackers on one side, the dinosaurs on the other. Will this never end?
David D’Souza, director of profession at the CIPD, the human resources body, says it is a distraction “from critical conversations about productivity, flexibility, job security, fairness and balance. Organisations should be weighing up the complex factors behind this decision-making based on evidence, rather than just feelings or what they see.” [others] Some HR managers tell him that there is “pressure from the CEO” to see more physical presence in the place “for personal taste or nostalgia.”
However, despite the noise, the reality is that leaders are generally pragmatic. Most white-collar employers offer some flexibility in location because it benefits staff and bosses. In the US, 67 percent did, according to the Flex Index report. In the UK, the CIPD puts it at 83 percentA recent study in the Nature The magazine found that “a hybrid schedule with two days a week working from home does not harm performance” and improves staff satisfaction and retention.
Nick Bloom, one of the authors, told me he’s skeptical of Jassy’s performance rationale because it goes against “data from a lot of other studies at other companies that show that when you have three days a week in the office that leads to about the same productivity as five.” While two extra days increases face time, mentoring and culture-building, staff don’t get quiet time at home to work hard. Countering the slacker argument, “we know that workers who work from home tend to skip lunch and work pretty hard during the day,” he said.
Which raises another explanation for Jassy’s RTO mandate. In his memo, he outlined a future vision for Amazon with “fewer managers.” [to] “Remove layers and flatten organizations.” Bloom reflects on presenteeism as the best strategy to achieve this. “Requiring five days in the office will lead to an increase in resignations.”
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, but one thing is certain: Amazon needs home workers. Otherwise, who will be there for package deliveries?