RTO is not about reversing WFH, but about reimagining work from scratch RTO (Return to Office) requirements have been making headlines for the past year. In many places, it’s been mandated. In other places, a variety of arrangements exist. RTO is a contentious topic and invites heated arguments. This reason for this is because RTO is considered a reversal of WFH (Work from Home). WFH, especially permanent WFH, is a seductive arrangement that seems to suit everyone, but in the end benefits no one. [My post on that]. Nearly 5 years have passed since WFH started to become prominent. The key to successful RTO is see it from a difference lens — to make it an opportunity to re-design a new work and employee experience. This post explores why simply returning to the old ways won’t work and proposes a design for RTO that can benefit both employees and employers. Problem parameters Design stems from a problem. WFH has the following problem areas. WFH has led to lower overall productivity. While workers may feel productive individually, productivity has tanked (problem of local maxima sub-optimizing the whole). What took days, now takes weeks, weeks; months, and so on. An order of magnitude almost. WFH eschews rich (face-to-face) communication channels, and makes it hard for new people to integrate. This is a problem for new generation Z workers who are entering the workforce. With remote work and lockdowns featuring in their final school/university years, a lot of them don’t have experience of physical interactions. While WFH has led to savings on commute time, the boundary between home and work is obscured, which creates its own set of issues. Hybrid work is frustrating. Many offices have hybrid work like 3 days from office and two WFH. This has created other issues. Mondays and Fridays are usually preferred by teams to WFH. This leaves all the rush on midweek. To make matters worse, with WFH increasing, organizations have reduced office space. This leads to 100% people competing for 80% seats. There is nothing worse than travelling to an office and not find seat! Other issues are also there. Managers can pull rank (they get WFH while team has to be in office) or one could turn up to an office only to be in online meetings throughout the day! Paradigm shift WFH, despite seeming like mere change of location, is actually a completely different style of work. Therefore, “reversing” extended WFH or implementing RTO, needs to be much more than simply requiring the location to change from remote to on-premise. RTO is not just WFH with location changed to on-premise. More importantly, RTO is also not what work was pre-pandemic. RTO requires new thinking, especially in light of the economic and technical factors that are rapidly shifting the jobscape. Several jobs are being cut or outsourced, while many more are expected to be obliterated by the arrival of AI [my post on that]. The implication is clear. RTO must be re-designed from scratch, with employee experience and modern workflows in mind. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. Proposed design To keep the post brief, I’ll outline key design principles and a proposed design, without delving into too much detail. I’ll use two guiding design principles: 1) aim for positive employee experience and 2) treat RTO as new work model. RTO Experience The first step is to create 2 role classes: Fully Remote and Fully In-Office. Hybrid work is messy and nebulous. It’s better to have polarised options, and set expectations accordingly. Remote roles can be worked fully remotely on a permanent basis — these employees never need to turn up in person to the office. This is useful for provincial workers, temporary, and certain admin or specialist roles. Some of these roles will be at risk of offshoring (if a job can be done remotely, it can also be done by a cheaper remote work globally) and eventually obliteration (it can also be done remotely by AI). It’s important to be truthful with employees and set short- and long-term expectations, of the role and its expected trajectory, accordingly. On-premise roles. This is the norm. People are expected to be in office on all their rostered days. However instead of the traditional 9–5, this only needs to be for core office hours of say 10–3. The remaining hours they can complete as they see fit. Having core hours gives the benefit of rich collaboration and the flexibility to work around school pickups, traffic etc. The implicit message is that the office is where value is maximally added, and n hours of value-added work must be performed in the office. In sum, RTO experience is divided into two types — distant and transactional relationship vs close and collaborative relationship. Manager and employee can choose accordingly. Keeps it clean for everyone. RTO parameters The second step is to define norms. These factors ensure that day-to-day employee experience is consistent and pleasant. The first thing is dedicated desks. No more faffing around trying to find a hot desk. RTO has to be about employees re-taking ownership of their work, and workplace. Dedicated desks. The second thing is clear rules about sickness. The concept of (permanent) WFH started in response to the pandemic — and the fear of contagious diseases. An epidemic can happen anytime. We all know the one person who uses sick leave to play golf and but happily comes to work when coughing and splattering all over the place! If someone is sick, for their and others safety, sick leave is mandatory. The third thing is reviewing job design. People claim that WFH can be great for all these “admin” tasks. In RTO, the aim should be to maximize value-add time, and therefore reduce admin tasks, either via technology or by questioning their value. Return To Office, requires, and will benefit greatly, from revamped job design. The final thing is dovetailing RTO with general wellbeing, particularly countering the ill-effects of remote or over work. For example, a rule saying no emails after 7pm (until urgent) or no weekend work etc. This is to ensure people don’t get burnt out and do “switch off”. The above shows the bones of the general design, which can be detailed, and tailored, to different industries, as required. In the last 5 years, the world has seen big upheaval. With economies struggling and unprecedented disruption by AI inevitable, a great deal of change lies ahead. Organizations must adapt to thrive while also contributing the recovery of their respective national economies. This will require commitment, sacrifices and co-design between employees and employer. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. More than a mere instruction, it should be seen as a design challenge on how to take organizations forward in the most efficient and collaborative way possible. RTO is not about reversing WFH, but about reimagining work from scratch RTO (Return to Office) requirements have been making headlines for the past year. In many places, it’s been mandated. In other places, a variety of arrangements exist. RTO is a contentious topic and invites heated arguments. This reason for this is because RTO is considered a reversal of WFH (Work from Home). WFH, especially permanent WFH, is a seductive arrangement that seems to suit everyone, but in the end benefits no one. [My post on that]. headlines headlines reversal post post post Nearly 5 years have passed since WFH started to become prominent. The key to successful RTO is see it from a difference lens — to make it an opportunity to re-design a new work and employee experience . This post explores why simply returning to the old ways won’t work and proposes a design for RTO that can benefit both employees and employers. re-design a new work and employee experience proposes a design Problem parameters Design stems from a problem. WFH has the following problem areas. WFH has led to lower overall productivity . While workers may feel productive individually, productivity has tanked (problem of local maxima sub-optimizing the whole). What took days, now takes weeks, weeks; months, and so on. An order of magnitude almost. WFH has led to lower overall productivity local maxima WFH eschews rich (face-to-face) communication channels , and makes it hard for new people to integrate. This is a problem for new generation Z workers who are entering the workforce. With remote work and lockdowns featuring in their final school/university years, a lot of them don’t have experience of physical interactions. WFH eschews rich (face-to-face) communication channels While WFH has led to savings on commute time, the boundary between home and work is obscured, which creates its own set of issues. boundary Hybrid work is frustrating. Many offices have hybrid work like 3 days from office and two WFH. This has created other issues. Mondays and Fridays are usually preferred by teams to WFH. This leaves all the rush on midweek. To make matters worse, with WFH increasing, organizations have reduced office space. This leads to 100% people competing for 80% seats. There is nothing worse than travelling to an office and not find seat! Hybrid work is frustrating. Other issues are also there. Managers can pull rank (they get WFH while team has to be in office) or one could turn up to an office only to be in online meetings throughout the day! Paradigm shift WFH, despite seeming like mere change of location, is actually a completely different style of work. Therefore, “reversing” extended WFH or implementing RTO, needs to be much more than simply requiring the location to change from remote to on-premise. RTO is not just WFH with location changed to on-premise. More importantly, RTO is also not what work was pre-pandemic. RTO requires new thinking, especially in light of the economic and technical factors that are rapidly shifting the jobscape. Several jobs are being cut or outsourced, while many more are expected to be obliterated by the arrival of AI [my post on that]. The implication is clear. RTO must be re-designed from scratch, with employee experience and modern workflows in mind. post post The implication is clear. RTO must be re-designed from scratch, with employee experience and modern workflows in mind. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. Proposed design To keep the post brief, I’ll outline key design principles and a proposed design, without delving into too much detail. I’ll use two guiding design principles: 1) aim for positive employee experience and 2) treat RTO as new work model. RTO Experience The first step is to create 2 role classes: Fully Remote and Fully In-Office. Hybrid work is messy and nebulous. It’s better to have polarised options, and set expectations accordingly. Remote roles can be worked fully remotely on a permanent basis — these employees never need to turn up in person to the office. This is useful for provincial workers, temporary, and certain admin or specialist roles. Some of these roles will be at risk of offshoring (if a job can be done remotely, it can also be done by a cheaper remote work globally) and eventually obliteration (it can also be done remotely by AI). It’s important to be truthful with employees and set short- and long-term expectations, of the role and its expected trajectory, accordingly. Remote roles need offshoring obliteration On-premise roles. This is the norm. People are expected to be in office on all their rostered days. However instead of the traditional 9–5, this only needs to be for core office hours of say 10–3. The remaining hours they can complete as they see fit. Having core hours gives the benefit of rich collaboration and the flexibility to work around school pickups, traffic etc. The implicit message is that the office is where value is maximally added , and n hours of value-added work must be performed in the office. On-premise roles. all core office hours of say 10–3. core office hours core hours office is where value is maximally added value n In sum, RTO experience is divided into two types — distant and transactional relationship vs close and collaborative relationship. Manager and employee can choose accordingly. Keeps it clean for everyone. vs RTO parameters The second step is to define norms. These factors ensure that day-to-day employee experience is consistent and pleasant. The first thing is dedicated desks. No more faffing around trying to find a hot desk. RTO has to be about employees re-taking ownership of their work, and workplace. Dedicated desks. The second thing is clear rules about sickness. The concept of (permanent) WFH started in response to the pandemic — and the fear of contagious diseases. An epidemic can happen anytime. We all know the one person who uses sick leave to play golf and but happily comes to work when coughing and splattering all over the place! If someone is sick, for their and others safety, sick leave is mandatory. The third thing is reviewing job design. People claim that WFH can be great for all these “admin” tasks. In RTO, the aim should be to maximize value-add time, and therefore reduce admin tasks, either via technology or by questioning their value. Return To Office, requires, and will benefit greatly, from revamped job design. The final thing is dovetailing RTO with general wellbeing, particularly countering the ill-effects of remote or over work. For example, a rule saying no emails after 7pm (until urgent) or no weekend work etc. This is to ensure people don’t get burnt out and do “switch off”. The first thing is dedicated desks . No more faffing around trying to find a hot desk. RTO has to be about employees re-taking ownership of their work, and workplace. Dedicated desks. dedicated desks dedicated desks The second thing is clear rules about sickness. The concept of (permanent) WFH started in response to the pandemic — and the fear of contagious diseases. An epidemic can happen anytime. We all know the one person who uses sick leave to play golf and but happily comes to work when coughing and splattering all over the place! If someone is sick, for their and others safety, sick leave is mandatory. rules rules The third thing is reviewing job design . People claim that WFH can be great for all these “admin” tasks. In RTO, the aim should be to maximize value-add time, and therefore reduce admin tasks, either via technology or by questioning their value. Return To Office, requires, and will benefit greatly, from revamped job design. reviewing job design The final thing is dovetailing RTO with general wellbeing , particularly countering the ill-effects of remote or over work. For example, a rule saying no emails after 7pm (until urgent) or no weekend work etc. This is to ensure people don’t get burnt out and do “switch off”. general wellbeing general wellbeing The above shows the bones of the general design, which can be detailed, and tailored, to different industries, as required. In the last 5 years, the world has seen big upheaval. With economies struggling and unprecedented disruption by AI inevitable, a great deal of change lies ahead. Organizations must adapt to thrive while also contributing the recovery of their respective national economies. This will require commitment, sacrifices and co-design between employees and employer. RTO should be a way to re-establish and re-design the relationships between employees, work and the workplace. More than a mere instruction, it should be seen as a design challenge on how to take organizations forward in the most efficient and collaborative way possible.
