AIBU to think that if WFH employees aren’t getting their work done, the problem is with their management?

[Chessboardtable]

So many people seem bitter about WFH and claim employees just slack off.

I WFH and have done since 2020 and my output since 2020 has been higher than before 2020. I work in a job where output is pretty easy to measure.

I am also a billion times happier for numerous reasons I won’t list but the main ones are not having to leave DC in after school club until it closes, no stressful commute on frequently delayed trains and more time to exercise.

I do my work flexibility, e.g. yesterday I finished early to collect DC at 3.30pm but I had worked Wednesday and Thursday evenings to get the work done in advance.

AIBU to think if WFH staff aren’t doing their work, they are not being effectively managed?

I mean, the flip side of that is why on earth are you doing more than you're contracted to do?

r89 money diaries?

I think the comments about WFH can come from a lack of understanding that some jobs have an ebb and flow. There are some jobs and you have 60-80 queries a day and that’s the same everyday. A particularly busy might see 100 queries but those 20 queries will go unanswered. My jobs have always been days of about 6 hours worth of work or 12 hours worth of work. There’s quiet times and busy times.

Even before the mass WFH of 2020, I’ve always worked flexibly even in the office. Everywhere I’ve worked has had core hours of 10-12 and 2-4, you could be in the office 7-7 without having to let security know/follow lone worker policies. So you could take a long lunch to meet a friend for lunch, go get your hair done, go the gym. You could come in late and leave early if you had a quiet day but knew you would be getting a project in a few days which would require more time.

Those type of organisations, in my experience, promoted people to manager level not based on their ability to actually manage but based on their seniority and technical knowledge (often which couldn’t be faulted). So there were a lot of piss-takers even with 100% office. If you want to take the piss, you’ll find infinite ways of taking the piss. I think a big problem, regardless of where people work, is that we don’t invest in training managers.

WFH and flexible working is the future of work. People born today won’t ever have open plan traditional offices to commute to to sit in front of a computer all day.

Some people will slack off at work full stop.

in offices I’ve seen people watch YouTube endlessly, pop out for unknown reasons and chat to their neighbours all day equally I’m sure they would be doing the same at home.

work ethic is completely separate from work location and commuting is bad for the planet, expensive and time consuming.

I think the comments about WFH can come from a lack of understanding that some jobs have an ebb and flow.

I think they do understand, they just don't like it because their jobs don't work that way. I mean, there's definitely an element of "well, why should you be able to do it when I can't? It's not faaair" in a lot of the responses, even if they don't explicitly say it.

I work for myself and often pop back home during the day for various things - to feed the cats, to do some laundry, to have a coffee - it doesn't impact any of my clients as I plan my diary to give me those breaks in between jobs. But no doubt a lot of people think I'm slacking simply because they work somewhere where they can't do those things.

Employers who wanted staff "back in the office" did that in 2021. (although I know a few who are reverting to hybrid and remote because of the damaging effect on recruitment/retention/wellbeing).

Those employers who are still facilitating hybrid and remote are pretty committed to it now.

My own workplace firstly downsized from 200 desks to 20 and now to only 6. There is no "back to the office" going to happen here.

The genie is not going to go back in to the bottle.

Next on our agenda is a 4 day week.

I love WFH, the flexibility, the not having to travel, the cost savings. My employer works on achievement and as long as I do my job there's no problem.

People who take the mickey spoil it for everyone. If I would I'd lockdown their entire internet access!

The people who are useless in an office, are also useless at home.

I am productive in both settings, because I am good at my job. But my high output also allowed me flexibilities other team members didn't get, my boss was more willing to allow me to flex my hours than others because I was always the highest performer..

Now I am a manager, and my team is agile so a mix of office, wfh and on the road. I won't micromanage them, and I expect them to work. If they don't, then we have to have a conversation although so far I haven't had to.

I think there's some of both.

I said ‘self employed’ They can hardly pay themselves extra for not being able to work from home.

I love WFH - super productive....BUT that is not training the future of my field...so a mix for me is a necessity...but depends on field and company/organisation

I'm much more productive at home. Noisy co workers just distract me

I agree with OP.

For context, I WFH and in my previous job I managed others who WFH too so seen both sides of the coin. My job is very much project/task-based rather than operational so that will shape my experience too.

I worked less productively in an office environment due to distractions/randomly being pulled into meetings or conversations that I wasn't really needed for/extended lunches with senior management etc. I make far more progress at home because I'm in a comfortable environment that's set up to be as undistracting as possible, and if people can't see me they generally won't bother me!

I hit my targets and I get good feedback. I'll not necessarily work a full 7.5 hours a day, but will work late when needed to to get things over the line in time. I've found that having time to 'think' provides better output for my job than trying to just fill up my time doing tasks (which often leads to just plowing ahead with your first method, when an alternative would have been better suited and more efficient).

Where team members/my reports are underperforming, management has been able to have conversations with them to diagnose why that is - is it (a) competency, (b) motivation, (c) confidence, (d) just shit work ethic? I've only come across one case where it was shit work ethic - all other cases were a case of the person needing additional support, and they ended up becoming valuable to the team following the right conversations + progression plan.

You can't measure someone's contribution to an organisation by meetings attended, keyboard strokes, or mouse movements - the most inefficient people are often great at all three. You'll find you get the most value from those who take some space to sit back and think about a problem, formulate a plan for how to implement it, and then go ahead and get it done.

E.g. compare the 'productivity' of someone who spends 1 hour manually copy-pasting values from one excel sheet to another vs someone who gets the same end product through a 20-second vlookup. Or someone who attends a pointless meeting for an hour where they contribute nothing vs the person who declines the meeting and comes up with an idea for an additional revenue stream whilst doing the laundry. But often the person who does the 1 hour copy-paste will often resent the vlookup person for not doing the 59.5 minutes of pointless work and the meeting attender will resent the laundry person for 'dossing'.

There are, of course, jobs that you need to be constantly present for - e.g. if you work remotely in a call centre/customer services etc. In those cases, you really can't be excused for stacking the dishwasher when your job role is literally dependent on your availability.

You can't measure someone's contribution to an organisation by meetings attended, keyboard strokes, or mouse movements - the most inefficient people are often great at all three. You'll find you get the most value from those who take some space to sit back and think about a problem, formulate a plan for how to implement it, and then go ahead and get it done

E.g. compare the 'productivity' of someone who spends 1 hour manually copy-pasting values from one excel sheet to another vs someone who gets the same end product through a 20-second vlookup. Or someone who attends a pointless meeting for an hour where they contribute nothing vs the person who declines the meeting and comes up with an idea for an additional revenue stream whilst doing the laundry. But often the person who does the 1 hour copy-paste will often resent the vlookup person for not doing the 59.5 minutes of pointless work and the meeting attender will resent the laundry person for 'dossing

Completely agree @CaribouCarafe . My job has creative aspects and I had some of my best ideas when I’m out on a run or doing Pilates rather than when I’m sat at my desk staring at a screen

@Chessboardtable funnily enough this article popped up on my newsfeed straight after I made my post that basically confirms that mundane/non work tasks can help creativity