Grace Lordan is author of ‘Think Big’, an associate professor at the London School of Economics and founding director of The Inclusion Initiative
The evolution of the role of the office in the future of work is still a hot topic — and rightly so. We are seeing a gradual reimagining of where, when and how we work. My research as a behavioural scientist has found much of that shift is being driven by employees.
Research I published on behalf of Women in Banking & Finance, an organisation for financial services professionals, shows some City staff are ignoring leaders’ orders to come into the office on a set number of days per week. They are instead focusing on a “remote first” approach, working in the office when it is beneficial to them, in terms of productivity and in meeting the company’s operational needs.
This study was conducted by my team at the London School of Economics in The Inclusion Initiative, a unit that uses data and evidence-based research to show what works (and what does not) to make workplaces more inclusive and promote gender equality.
We interviewed 100 staff members at different seniority levels in financial services companies, 70 of whom were women. Employers included Bank of America, BlackRock, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Schroders and UBS.
We then came up with a wider blueprint that offered a vision for the future of work in the financial services sector that was effective, inclusive, and applicable for other organisations and sectors. We called it, optimistically, the Utopia Framework.
We approached the research with open minds and allowed the respondents to discuss the future of work without input from ourselves.
The majority of respondents spoke of the importance of reducing stress and illness in the sector, with a focus on making sure managers and HR departments dealt promptly and empathetically with problems of isolation, bullying and burnout.
Strikingly, no one mentioned it was employers’ responsibility to improve staff happiness at work.
Our interviewees repeatedly pointed to the importance of prioritising psychological safety. This meant building a work culture where employees felt secure and had the freedom to bring their own perspectives. This can be challenging for leaders — sometimes staff tell them what they don’t want to hear — but it is particularly beneficial for roles that require risk assessment or innovation, where having diverse teams that can be honest allows for better outcomes.
We were surprised by how much attention our interviewees gave to the role of flexible work in their post-pandemic lives. It has surfaced as a critical matter for leaders and managers to get right.
Many managers we spoke to articulated a view of “what’s the point of showing up at the office for the sake of it?”
“Sometimes I’m told: ‘You really should be in on this Thursday or it will look bad,’ and actually I didn’t want to be in on this Thursday because I’ve got just Zooms,” said one interviewee.
We did not find coercion or sanctions being applied to get people back to the office. More common were positive incentives to draw people to the office. Offers ranged from talks by big-name inspirational speakers, to social events and free food.
Our wider research suggests mandating fixed days in the office is already outdated and is not going to get the best from a workforce, especially in organisations where improving all measures of diversity and inclusion is a priority.
Our research found near-unanimous agreement that there was no “one size fits all” when it came to optimal working, and that functions and teams should define locally when they should be in the office.
One interviewee in a senior management role said: “We get a lot more from our people when they feel trusted to make their own decisions . . . we used to hear people saying, ‘I had to throw [the kids] at the nanny and get into the office for 9am.’ One of the things I’m always saying to people is, ‘I’d rather have you here for six hours where you’re really productive than for ten hours when you’re really stressed.’”
How much productivity are leaders losing by forcing employees to bend their optimal working style to match what employers are demanding? Unless you are on an assembly line, the amount of time you work hasn’t been shown to link to your outputs. And this is the key point for the financial services sector.
A focus on output over hours will mean colleagues see the point of being in the office on the days they are asked versus working autonomously. Some leaders may worry that employees will take advantage of remote work and will not perform well. Reassuringly, there is good evidence that when employees are allowed to work with heightened autonomy, it improves engagement without compromising performance.
There is also evidence that giving flexibility increases trust and psychological safety from team members towards their manager.
Overall, financial and professional companies that value productivity should choose a future of work that blends autonomous working and being on-site in a way that maximises their organisation’s productivity and operational needs.
Taking this approach will allow companies to recruit, promote and retain more diverse pools of talented people, since those with parenting and caring responsibilities, as well as those with disabilities, particularly benefit from flexible working patterns.
Source: ft.com
