What’s wrong with remote work?
IBM’s
decision to recall some of its employees back to office spawns yet another
debate on the efficacy of working from home
Four
years ago Marissa Meyer decreed Yahoo employees could no longer work from home.
This year, it is IBM CMO Michelle Peluso’s turn to tell her 2,600-people-strong
marketing department that there will be no more telecommuting. Other adopters
of this hardline approach include one of Silicon Valley’s greatest success
story – Google.
IBM’s
decision is shocking, however, as it was the pioneer of remote work. Big Blue
allowed employees to work from home way back in the ’80s, when the technology
to telecommute was not so great. In today’s hyper-connected world when everyone
is just a voice, text or video call away and the millennial culture is to work
from anywhere, it does seem counter-intuitive. Especially as studies have shown
that administrative costs for a company do lessen (by as much as 15 per cent),
and it has a direct bearing on productivity as well as happiness (no commuting
stress, more time for hobbies).
But
IBM’s explanation, in Peluso’s words, is: “There is something about a team
being more powerful, more impactful, more creative, and frankly hopefully
having more fun when they are shoulder to shoulder.”
This
raises a few questions.
Is
innovation and creativity really linked to close collaboration?
“Yes
and no,” says Saundarya Rajesh, founder & President of Avatar Group, which
runs a talent strategy consulting firm as well as a flexible working platform
for women.
“Yes,
because a product requires the full complement of thought capital from diverse
individuals to pass through the various stages that take it to market,” she
explains. “And no, because in many cases, innovation is largely an individual
process – at this stage, collaboration might actually be counter-productive,”
says Rajesh.
She
believes that the initial processes do not really warrant close collaboration.
“However, closer to the go-to-market stage an innovation has to be weathered to
meet customer expectations which requires the team work that IBM speaks of,”
she says.
What
does a creative industry such as advertising think about this? Manish Bhatt,
Founder-Director of Scarecrow Communications, says, “It’s true that in today’s
world you can use Skype, chat, but when a lot of people are involved in the
creative process, brainstorming together is required.”
Having
said that, Bhatt describes how he has worked on projects remotely. “When I
directed my film in New York, I got the music and complete voiceover from
India. Everything was recorded there and we collaborated through chat. In
future, if it is a simple film, I have decided I will not even travel to the
location – simply get it shot,” he says. And yet, he insists, for agency work,
remote working is not a good idea.
Even
Dhanabalan RK, Vice President – Human Resources of Maveric Systems, which has a
need-based and fairly lenient work from home (WFH) policy, says he sees merit
in the IBM argument. “In businesses where employees work in teams, sharing a
location builds camaraderie, innovation, and cooperation, which are essential
to individual and team success,” he says.
So
is remote work now going to be under threat?
It
all depends on what the policy is for. The three biggest reasons for companies
to introduce WFH are to do with work-life integration, attracting key talent,
and driving cost efficiencies. Says Rajesh, “Over 66 per cent of remote workers
in IT/ITES companies (according to a 2008 TCS study) are women, not because
they become more productive, but because their work-life situation requires it
and a company allows it, with the express condition that once the “critical
stage” of the employee work-life passes, he or she can come back to work at the
office.
As
Rajesh points out, there are several gaping breaches in aspects such as
accountability, performance measurement and leadership development that
flexibility doesn’t fully answer. However, many companies have devised formulas
that work.
Hybrid
versions of the policy are coming up whereby the employee can work from home
only a certain number of days – an approach followed by Maveric.
At
Genesys, a customer experience technology firm, managers can fix a suitable
policy for their teammates. Michael Katten, Senior Director, Technical
Publications and Interim Site Lead – Chennai, Genesys, says that for managers
whose employees have meetings with corporateheadquarters late at night, or have
independent contributor work, WFH is a valued option.
Others
such as Sapient believe constant monitoring is the answer. “We do a periodic
dipstick of how the person is doing, the viability of the arrangement and the
connection to the organisation,” says Khushnooma Mohan, Senior Manager, People
Strategy, Sapient India.
As
she sums up, “The value of work from home used judiciously with the right
mechanisms, organisational guidelines, manager support, HR assistance and
out-of-the box thinking is an unbeatable option.”
Source | Business Line | 13 April 2017
Regards
Pralhad
Jadhav
Senior
Manager @ Knowledge Repository
Khaitan & Co
Upcoming Event | MANLIBNET 17th Annual
International Conference on 15-16 September 2017 at Jaipuria, Noida, India
No comments:
Post a Comment