what's the obsession with "getting back to the office!

[Bells3032]

I get some people want to return to the office and i think they should have a right to. but i don't get the obsession that we "MUST" return to the office. Honestly, my DH and I have both been working from home. I am a public sector, he's private. his office have just started return but don't seem to be enforcing it much and they've also announced their best two years of profit ever.

I get some people e.g. those doing passports or probate etc would be much easier in the office as access to paperwork but my job is 100% computer based and I am far more productive at home.

1. no long commute so less tired plus less likelihood of being late.
2. no "nattering" in the office
3. no time wondering round looking for a desk in the morning and ending up with an inappropriate desk space because we are short. I have a proper desk and chair at home so less back pain
4. no trying to find meeting rooms - just hop on zoom and there everyone is
5. no spending time queuing for the toilet etc
6. less sickness as people not picking up bugs on the trains etc
7. they can sell some real estate or not pay as much rent

What actually would be the benefit to me or my employers to me returning to office? What is with the obsession? Could someone explain to me WHY I should return to the office?

But aren't you both just annoyed because you want to work from home and the idea of staff being recalled because of poor performance levels stops you from doing that?

In my team staff who weren't hitting targets were sent back to the office (and for the most part were happier for it), those of us who were hitting them were left alone. They didn't just throw us all back in.

The number of bosses I've had who were a line manager in name only.

A lot of line managers spend a lot more time in interminable meetings than they do actually managing staff.

But aren't you both just annoyed because you want to work from home and the idea of staff being recalled because of poor performance levels stops you from doing that?

No, though I’m mildly annoyed that you’ve made assumptions about me without being bothered to read my recent posts.

(I’m in senior management, my team’s productivity is objectively measured and is objectively better currently though I have invested heavily in skills and talent in that period as well, I think actively managed hybrid will be best for my team but will need to back that up with metrics, or I would if I hadn’t been headhunted and had my pick of several roles and was able to choose the one where the working model best suited my own preferences.)

And I’ve had a bee in my bonnet about the poor overall standard of management skills in the UK and the impact on productivity since looong before the pandemic.

@JassyRadlett. I'm sorry to have mildly annoyed you as you work in your pick from several roles where you were able to choose the one where the working model best suited your own preferences.. How many people do you think that are WFH and not pulling their weight get head-hunted? Actually, how many people WFH and are pulling their weight get head-hunted? Head hunting doesn't play a huge part in most people's working lives. 😂😂😂

@User135644

But aren't you both just annoyed because you want to work from home and the idea of staff being recalled because of poor performance levels stops you from doing that?

In my team staff who weren't hitting targets were sent back to the office (and for the most part were happier for it), those of us who were hitting them were left alone. They didn't just throw us all back in.

That’s the way to do it.

How many people do you think that are WFH and not pulling their weight get head-hunted?

Hopefully none, but in an organisation with decent management those not pulling their weight are dealt with promptly and effectively.

I’m good at what I do, I work hard, and I can prove it, so I’m in demand, as are many other workers in that situation, regardless of their level.

Those who prefer to retain staff who aren’t, don’t and/or can’t, rather than dealing with those issues, are putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

I’d rather have a team of the former rather than the latter, even with the upfront aggravation of dealing with the poor performance, myself. But it takes all sorts.

@JassyRadlett.
"I’m good at what I do, I work hard, and I can prove it, so I’m in demand, as are many other workers in that situation, regardless of their level."

I have worked as a ca in the civil service. I worked hard and was told to slow down because I was exceeding my daily target of work. I've worked as a teacher with consistent 1s or As in performance reviews. So I understand about working hard but people don't get head-hunted in these positions. You can't call your own shots in these positions. I'm glad you're in a position to make your own demands on your work patterns but that really isn't the experience of the average person.

Corporate office space is linked to most people’s pensions

Hopefully none, but in an organisation with decent management those not pulling their weight are dealt with promptly and effectively.

Not necessarily. Many organisations have found dealing with underperformance very difficult during the pandemic, because so many people have been trying to do their job whilst also homeschooling or being unpaid carers or working in sub-optimal environments or coping with depression and anxiety. If managers try to tackle their staff who they suspect have simply been slacking rather than struggling by asking only underperformers to return to the office, it opens up the risk of a whole barrage of grievances being raised that this is discriminatory, particularly if they claim the underperformance was due to childcare responsibilities or ill-health. It’s just far less legally risky to get everyone back in the office and then have a level playing field.

I have worked as a ca in the civil service. I worked hard and was told to slow down because I was exceeding my daily target of work. I've worked as a teacher with consistent 1s or As in performance reviews. So I understand about working hard but people don't get head-hunted in these positions. You can't call your own shots in these positions. I'm glad you're in a position to make your own demands on your work patterns but that really isn't the experience of the average person.

I didn’t start here. I’ve had luck but I’ve also worked hard, including on my management skills. That meant I was in a better position than others to get jobs I applied for elsewhere. I didn’t get headhunted for a long time and I recognise that I’m now incredibly fortunate to be in a field where I’m in active demand.

I’ve now developed a track record of being able to turn around poor performing teams which is a skill particularly in demand in my field; I’ve worked across the private sector, the civil service and the third sector. I’ve seen and experienced some shite management (and practised some myself.)

You’ve clearly experienced some terrible management yourself, and will know firsthand that poor management does not lead to increased performance and productivity.

So yes, now I’m being headhunted. I also hire people at all levels from apprentices to experienced managers. Those who can evidence their skills and track record will have a better choice of roles, and I am determined to be competitive as a hiring manager so that I can put together the best possible team.

My experience as a manager is that investing in management makes a huge difference to team performance. Not dealing with the ‘aggravation’ of tackling poor performance effectively is like an anchor on a team.

I’m not looking at this from an employee point of view - I only mentioned that because your assumptions were so off base, and to demonstrate that strong candidates will have their pick of employment conditions in the current recruitment environment, leaving those who are stuck in the past due to inadequate management stuck with a much smaller and less skilled candidate pool.

I’m looking at this from a management point of view, which is not an unusual viewpoint. I want a strong team. That means dealing with poor performance, even if it’s annoying and could easily be masked by introducing controls that treat the whole team as if they display the behaviours of the worst team member. It also means championing a work culture and conditions that attract the widest pool of candidates, so I can be confident I’ve hired the best person available.

I will consistently maintain that any manager who wants the whole team back in the office because they can’t be arsed to deal with individual poor performance or conduct is, in fact, a pisspoor manager taking an extremely short term view and is unlikely to be as productive as they should be with the available resources.

I am genuinely fascinated as to how you can effectively manage a team remotely.

@ComtesseDeSpair

Hopefully none, but in an organisation with decent management those not pulling their weight are dealt with promptly and effectively.

Not necessarily. Many organisations have found dealing with underperformance very difficult during the pandemic, because so many people have been trying to do their job whilst also homeschooling or being unpaid carers or working in sub-optimal environments or coping with depression and anxiety. If managers try to tackle their staff who they suspect have simply been slacking rather than struggling by asking only underperformers to return to the office, it opens up the risk of a whole barrage of grievances being raised that this is discriminatory, particularly if they claim the underperformance was due to childcare responsibilities or ill-health. It’s just far less legally risky to get everyone back in the office and then have a level playing field.

I’m not sure I quite buy this as an excuse for not dealing with a performance dip. I’m not saying it’s straight into formal measures, but if you’re not even trying to understand the factors contributing to a performance problem then you’re not doing the basics of management, remote or not.

I don’t think being remote is an excuse for not tackling performance issues as they arise, looking for external factors, looking to put appropriate support in place where needed and aiming to return to full capability in an agreed timeframe.

If a person wasn’t able to work their full hours due to childcare/school closures, we agreed a plan in advance, reviewed it regularly, checked in on how they were doing and whether adjustments were needed, in line with the organisation’s broader priorities. Staff member with long Covid exacerbated by anxiety - we worked through it in a similar way.

It hasn’t been easy, at all - it’s often been massively challenging especially with managers having their own challenges.

I have over the last year had a poor performer whose performance is a really difficult mix of difficult personal circumstances, the pandemic but also some underlying capability issues. Was it easy to unpick all of those? No. Worth it in the long run? Yes.

A ‘grievance avoidance’ approach to management, rather than active management that looks to understand all the reasons for performance issues, doesn’t strike me as particularly desirable.

Is the person who’s struggling going to do better back in the office, because the boss thought they were skiving and it’s easier to crack the whip in person? I don’t think ‘back in the office’ is any more level a playing field than anywhere else in the circumstances you’ve described.

@JayAlfredPrufrock

I am genuinely fascinated as to how you can effectively manage a team remotely.

Some teams it may not be possible, others it may actually be easier than in person, depending on the nature of the work. As others have said, lots of roles have been fully remote for years. Others have had managers based in a different location or even country, and geographically dispersed teams. My neighbour has direct reports in Melbourne, Dubai, Amsterdam, London and Dublin. The only thing that has changed in how she manages most of them is that she doesn’t fly to see most of them once a year.

Remote management wasn’t invented in March 2020.

@JassyRadlett. Like most people, I've had good mgt and bad mgt. I don't think it's influenced my prospects,at all. I've worked in the civil service, in public sector, charity sector and,at the moment in the private sector. I think I'm pretty familiar with different sectors. I'm not doing you or any of your high performing team down for being in a position to be head-hunted. I congratulate you all for it. But this is not typical of the national workforce. How many of your clerical staff or data inputters or telephone operators, etc are in a position to dictate their working practices? All of them can threaten to leave but realistically how many can just walk into other jobs where they can demand the hours they want that fit into their personal circumstances? Even the new law that gives people the right to ask, wont guarantee they'll get what they ask for.

But this is not typical of the national workforce. How many of your clerical staff or data inputters or telephone operators, etc are in a position to dictate their working practices?

Tbh, some of those roles are insanely hard to recruit to at the moment - we have been looking at our pressure points across the org and junior and clerical staff are some of the roles we’re finding it hard to recruit to. So we have to be attractive.

The labour market has changed massively, and quickly. We’d be naive to ignore that. Retaining good staff is a huge priority right now, particularly with the prospect of wage inflation.

But this is not typical of the national workforce.

I don’t disagree. It’s well documented that poor management skills in the U.K. are part of our productivity crisis.

All of them can threaten to leave but realistically how many can just walk into other jobs where they can demand the hours they want that fit into their personal circumstances?

I’ve never suggested that they can. But the employers who can offer more flexibility to those who want it will get the best candidates. It’s a competitive advantage. And that is particularly the case around working location at the moment. Talking to recruiters, the companies that are struggling most are those who are either 100% office based with no flex or even worse apparently are those who don’t have a fixed policy on future working practices yet.

Throwing away a competitive advantage because managing poor performance remotely (or at all) is a hassle isn’t a hallmark of good management. That’s the only point I’m making here.

I think we're just talking apples and oranges. Our working experiences,are just so different.

You say you worked your way up to your position in snr mgt, can you not remember what it was like to be a clerical assistant, with basic tasks? I guess you would say you were good at your job. Do you remember EOs or SEOs coming round and offering preferential working patterns for you? Maybe it happened and I was off that day. Or if there are companies offering great deals, then their staff aren't moving to create vacancies. The problem is still the same.

And if you're really having problems getting clerical staff, you need to move offices, because around where I live, they'd be snapped up in no time and people would be grateful to work in an office.

Anyway, you sound like a great manager and I'm glad you found a job that gives you the time to do that well. (Many of us are not that fortunate and it's just an extra duty on an already FT job!) I wish you all the best.

Add introverted to 'self motivated middle-aged people'

^

Add 'has small kids' and you have your wfh ideal candidate.

I think we're just talking apples and oranges. Our working experiences,are just so different.

We are, but I don’t think in the way you are suggesting. I’m really only talking about whether it’s a reasonable management response to have one or two poor performers WFH and think that ‘right, the only thing I can do to solve this is have everyone back in the office full time.’

You’ve seized on my own work experience as a bit of a distraction I think - and the majority of my working life was frankly not that far from the norm for a lot of people. Yep, I’m lucky now that I can pick and choose. By right now lots of people can pick and choose - and even if they couldn’t, what I’m describing above would still be poor management. And poor management will never get the best out of a team.

And yes, I’ve had many EOs and HEOs over the years request flexible working. It’s not that rare.

Many of us are not that fortunate and it's just an extra duty on an already FT job!) I wish you all the best.

And as I’ve said, I completely understand that (and have experienced it too.) The approach to and value placed on people management in the UK in general is a serious problem, if we want to solve the productivity crisis then the professionalisation of management and greater value placed on it is fundamental.

And the attitudes on this thread and others (dealing with poor performance effectively is an aggravation/easier to have everyone where you can watch them regardless/don’t really care about having an engaged workforce or look at whether things can improvise when the status quo is comfortable for the manager/you just can’t manage people remotely) show it’s pretty widespread.

Obviously people are not as efficient as they think they are WFH whatever they might say. Customer service is atrocious across the board rn to the point where my energy company has actually taken their contact number off their webpage, which merely confirms what has been the case for months - they will not answer your call.

That said, yes, a covid office is miserable. I'm a low paid drone so have been in the office since last May when all of us plebs were required to do so. None of the management ofc. It is frankly speaking a shit hole. Roped off areas, desks with piles of crap in, shoes and stationery and rotting food. It's been like working on the set of Blade Runner with the added frisson of 'am I going to get this killer disease on my bus journey in to a job that I'm getting paid fuck all for?' So I guess at least you haven't had that on your work radar for a while.

But yeah people do need to get back to work. Most times I need higher authorisation for something, it doesn't happen, so us office folks have been muddling along on our own, making shit up, getting shit wrong. It's not really working.

I’ve had occasion to speak to student finance several times in recent months (oh joy). On each occasion the person I’ve spoken to has been working from home. And each one has told me something different.

Would that have happened if they’d been in an open plan office where others could hear them 🤷‍♀️

Obviously people are not as efficient as they think they are WFH whatever they might say. Customer service is atrocious across the board rn to the point where my energy company has actually taken their contact number off their webpage, which merely confirms what has been the case for months - they will not answer your call.

I’m not sure it’s ‘obviously’ across the board, or even within customer service - plenty of reports of contact centres shedding staff because of Covid and not replacing them, and then using Covid/WFH as the reason for poor service rather than ‘we cut staff numbers by a third to save money.’

That said, there is undoubtedly shite management at many of these places (both people and systems) which probably does mean customer service is worse remotely than in person.

The management in your workplace sounds really challenging and miserable if you can’t get authorisations and necessary direction unless you’re all under the same roof. That sucks and I’m sorry, I can see why you want to get back in.

I have been trying to get in touch with someone central at Premier Inn to move a booking, which you’d think would be simple and could be done online. Nobody answers the phone and when you finally find the online email contact form, it says they’re very busy due to covid but they’ll reply within 35 days!

35!

I have been trying to get in touch with someone central at Premier Inn to move a booking, which you’d think would be simple and could be done online. Nobody answers the phone and when you finally find the online email contact form, it says they’re very busy due to covid but they’ll reply within 35 days!

Yep, totally taking the piss. And maybe, if they are actually fully staffed and can’t invest in proper remote systems and management, their best short term option is to get everyone back in the office.

I wouldn’t place bets that they are working fully staffed (and who can blame them after the financial hit they’ve taken, in a way.)

And it’s definitely a short term view that papers over the cracks. I definitely disagree with others on the thread that in five years we’ll be back to pre-Covid arrangements. The world of work was already shifting significantly towards more remote and flexible working before the pandemic - Covid massively accelerated it and forced the issue well ahead of a lot of organisations having the systems or skills to be able to deal with it. That doesn’t mean that the model itself is flawed, or that the pre-Covid trajectory won’t be maintained and/or accelerated.