Posted on 08/03/2023 10:38:50 AM PDT by ShadowAce
We’re now finding out the damaging consequences of the mandated return to office. And it’s not a pretty picture. A trio of compelling reports—the Greenhouse Candidate Experience report, the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED), and Unispace’s Returning for Good report—collectively paint a stark picture of this brewing storm.
Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. And almost a third (29%) of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. In other words, employers knew the mandates would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.
Meanwhile, a staggering 76% of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work schedules, according to the Greenhouse report. Moreover, employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22% more likely to consider other options if flexibility comes to an end.
In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.
Flexible work policies have emerged as the ultimate edge in talent acquisition and retention. The Greenhouse, SHED, and Unispace reports, when viewed together, provide compelling evidence to back this assertion.
Greenhouse finds that 42% of candidates would outright reject roles that lack flexibility. In turn, the SHED survey affirms that employees who work from home a few days a week greatly treasure the arrangement.
The Greenhouse report has ranked employees’ priorities as:
In other words, excluding career-centric factors such as pay, security, and promotion, flexible work ranks first in employees’ priorities.
Interestingly, Unispace throws another factor into the mix: choice. According to its report, overall, the top feelings employees revealed they felt toward the office were happy (31%), motivated (30%), and excited (27%). However, all three of these feelings decrease for those with mandated office returns (27%, 26%, and 22%, respectively). In other words, staff members were more open to returning to the office if it was out of choice, rather than forced.
Recently, I was contacted by a regional insurance company with a workforce of around 2,000 employees. The company enforced a return-to-office policy, causing waves of unrest. It soon became evident that its attrition rates were climbing steadily. In line with the Greenhouse report’s findings, most employees would actively seek a new job if flexible work policies were retracted. The underrepresented groups were even more prone to leave, making the situation more daunting.
At that point, the company called me to help as a hybrid work expert who the New York Times has called “the office whisperer.” We worked on adapting the return-to-office plan, switching it from a top-down mandate to a team-driven approach, and focusing on welcoming staff to the office for the sake of collaboration and mentoring. As a result, the company’s attrition rates dropped and the feelings of employees toward the office improved, in line with what the Unispace report suggests.
In another case, a large financial services company began noticing employee turnover despite offering competitive salaries and growth opportunities. Upon running an internal survey, managers realized that aside from better compensation and career advancement opportunities, employees were seeking better flexible work policies. This aligned with the Greenhouse and SHED findings, which ranked flexible work policies as a crucial factor influencing job changes. After consulting with me, they adjusted their policies to be more competitive in offering flexibility.
A late-stage SaaS startup decided to embrace this wave of change. The company worked with me to introduce flexible work policies, and the result was almost immediate: Managers noticed a sharp decrease in employee turnover and an uptick in job applications. Their story echoes the collective message from all three reports: Companies must adapt to flexible work policies or risk being outcompeted by other employers.
As we navigate these shifting landscapes of work, we cannot ignore the human elements at play. Like unseen puppeteers, cognitive biases subtly shape our decisions and perceptions. In the context of flexibility and retention, two cognitive biases come into sharp focus: the status quo bias and anchoring bias.
Imagine a thriving tech startup, successfully operating in a hybrid model during the pandemic. As the world normalized, leadership decided to return to pre-pandemic, in-person work arrangements. However, they faced resistance and an unexpected swell of turnover.
This situation illustrates the potent influence of the status quo bias. This bias, deeply entrenched in our human psyche, inclines us toward maintaining current states or resisting change. Employees, having tasted the fruits of flexible work, felt averse to relinquishing these newfound freedoms.
Consider a large financial institution that enforced a full return to office after the pandemic. Many employees, initially attracted by the brand and pay scale, felt disgruntled. The crux of the problem lies in the anchoring bias, which leads us to heavily rely on the first piece of information offered (the anchor) when making decisions.
When initially joining the company, the employees were primarily concerned with compensation and job security. Once within the fold, the pandemic caused them to shift their focus to work-life balance and flexibility, as confirmed by both the Greenhouse and SHED reports. Unfortunately, the rigid return-to-office policy made these new anchors seem less attainable, resulting in dissatisfaction and an increased propensity to leave.
As we steer our ships through these tumultuous waters, understanding cognitive biases can help illuminate our path. Recognizing and accounting for the status quo and anchoring biases can enable us to create a workplace that not only attracts but also retains its employees in the new age of flexibility. After all, success in the world of business is as much about understanding people as it is about numbers and strategy.
bfl
My company is mandating three days a week in the office starting next month. Thankfully, I used the work at home period to reclassify as remote only.
Bahahaha all the lazy butts left lol
No one should give a crap about employees feelings. It's like crying in baseball. Ridiculous.
We’re not returning to the office. Ever.
I tell every bank and headhunter, its 100% remote or no deal. I haven’t had a problem finding projects to do.
Actually a lot of the best and most in-demand employees left.
If they were just losing low level, lesser skilled, less experienced drones, companies wouldn’t care. They’re losing the people they most wanted to keep. That’s why they’re worried.
It’s the way to go.
Maybe middle managers can learn actual jobs to do...
Fine! Don't care about how I feel about it. That's fine. I'll just work for someone else. The free market works both ways.
Have we now created an industry whose sole purpose is analyzing the behavior of a bunch of spoiled brats?
Too lazy to get their butts into the office
IDGAF
Fire them
This is what gives rise to "quiet quitting" and other factors leading to "worker shortages". Employers now blatantly don't care about their workers. Screw 'em. Exploit 'em. If times get tough, lay 'em off. Make them stay home. Make them come in. Who cares what the workers think???
And then companies are shocked that workers have no loyalty and just focus on the money and don't think too much about their own contribution to the work. As long as the paychecks keep coming, it's all good.
Hey, we're all out for Number One, aren't we?
Culled the heard I guess. Unfortunately, they’re going to go on the state and we’ll be footing the unemployment benefits.
Some of the people who have to return to the office are not returning to the same situations. Private offices were lost and employers gave up real estate and went to hoteling. I wouldn’t be happy about that and it would be as if the employer reneged on an agreement.
Many employees today have bought into the Democrats mantra of “entitlement” and thus aren’t interested in giving a good day’s work for a good day’s pay. As Bob Dylan said, “The times, they are a changing.”
“Gee, I liked staying home in my pajamas and working for 3 hours a day. Now I have to get dressed and go somewhere for eight hours to get paid?”
2020 called. They want you to come back.
My company is 100% remote. We are gaining market share and attracting the best and brightest.
Any company that can’t manage a remote work force needs better managers.
Looks like everyone these days wants to be their own boss, but they don’t want to actually WORK or have any responsibilities...but still get paid.
Ripe for the picking by Mother Government and her State Minions. She’s aces at paying people NOT to work! *SPIT*
Are we returning to Days of Old with a Butcher, a Baker and a Candlestick Maker?
Nah. Too much work beyond having to type into your computer all day long or be on the phone. *Rolleyes*
So GLAD to be out of the Rat Race. I’ve always had physically and mentally demanding jobs, and was paid accordingly. Wouldn’t go back to that now for anything.
The managers want you in the office so they can yell at you. They cannot do that on a zoom call as it is recorded : )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.