The other day a friend of mine told me that the organization she works for requires her to go back and work from the office. This is despite the fact that the amount and quality of work she and her teammates performed during the COVID-19 period increased significantly.
This story got me thinking about whether organizations are making decisions that conflict with their best interests and if so what brings them to it?
Of course, the mere testimony of an employee who has become more effective under certain conditions does not indicate that the entire organization would have been more effective. However, such a case immediately overwhelms the weight of the employee’s feelings. Does the organization give enough weight to the employee’s experience and if so what stops the organization from adjusting its methods to promote effectiveness.
Co-Location vs Location-Free
Recent events have led many organizations to transition to distributed work form. For some organizations, it is a natural and simple transition, part of their continuous evolution while for others it is a cumbersome and clumsy form of work, a temporary constraint as part of the measures to deal with “the situation”.
9 months ago (long before the COVID-19 age…) this article was published on Harvard Business Review. It explicitly reviews studies and researches made in the field. Bottom line: when working-from-anywhere implemented correctly it brings an increase in the organization's productivity.
These days, many organizations are stuck at the distributed-work crossroad. Puzzled with their position on the subject. Some may address the mere distributed-work question without seeing its broad context. And there is one.
Ac-count-ability
Here is a sweeping statement — organizations that rely on their employees are less busy with their physical location and in the way they do their jobs. On the other hand, organizations that are policing their employees are less reliant on them.
In fact, there is a deeper observation here. Let's ask ourselves what the organization base assumption is, about its employees' motivation.
An organization that doubts its ability to motivate employees to act for positive reasons (enthusiasm, interest, meaning) and assumes that the work done by employees by virtue of compulsion, cannot afford to lose control. In such a situation, the physical position of the worker is of crucial importance — the watchful eye of the big brother (in this case the boss) is critical in order to maintain the fear driving the worker into action.
But does such an organization really bring itself to its full effectiveness?
You get what you deserve
There is a self-fulfilling prophecy here.
Kind of “What you assume is what you get”…
An organization that assumes reluctance on the part of its employees — gets reluctant. An organization that lends enthusiasm and connection — earns it. Would such an organization necessarily only recruit enthusiastic people? Not so. However, in an environment where corporate culture assumes independence, loyalty, and diligence, people who don’t blend, will find their way out quite fast.
The opposite is also true — enlightened organizations that assume independent conduct from their employees without the need for close supervision, achieve more. Doubt that?
Frederic Laloux performed comprehensive research on the subject on which he wrote the book Reinventing Organizations. In essence, the more an organization trusts its employees and, of course, walk the talk, its chances of success increase significantly.
The Open Organization
Open source traffic has affected the world in different ways. One of the areas that have been affected and continue to be affected is management. Jim Whitehurst, CEO of Red Hat, wrote the book The Open Organization in which he explains how applying open-source principles at the organizational level has a positive effect on the organization's performance. Here’s how he defines an open organization:
“an organization that engages participative communities both inside and out — responds to opportunities more quickly, has access to resources and talent outside the organization, and inspires, motivates, and empowers people at all levels to act with accountability. “
An open organization by definition values its people intentions and assumes they are passion-driven. Hence an open organization has no issue with location-free work mode. Location is a non-issue at the first place!
Key Takeaway
Now it's the time for organizations across the globe to better understand the relationship between their level of openness (i.e. their corporate culture) and their level of decentralization (i.e. their policing level). One can only hope that as many organizations as possible would realize the futility of centralization in our age.
COVID-19 events triggered a unique opportunity for organizations to make a leap towards openness.
Deciding on your work mode (Co-Location or Location Free) actually touches at the heart of the organizational culture whether it is open or not. So better address the cultural issue first then its ramifications.
