From the academic studies I had to research to inform my workplace on pros/cons of remote work, that wasn’t the conclusion. I’m paraphrasing but the majority of those that self reported their own productivity highlighted an overwhelming increase in productivity.
When it came down to aggregate productivity (in jobs with quantifiable KPIs), they found moderate to significant increases in productivity as long as management adjusted their managing style to accommodate remote. This opinion differed the higher up in management that studies polled.
For my workplace specifically, they had invested multiple billions throughout the entire portfolio into longterm building leases (10+ years) and could not leave these agreements so it was easier for upper management to justify the sunken cost of leases than employee opinion or perceived/measured increases in productivity.
I’m sorry but your conclusions you drew aren’t in line with reality, specifically at my organization.
Ego and sunken cost were the main reasons at least at my workplace to reimplement back to work orders.
The majority of higher level management were not able to pivot to a remote scenario and were not willing to invest in the training and additional tech infrastructure necessary to convert to remote by design. It would have required deep restructuring and loss of middle management positions.
Our organization had multiple decades long leases that were signed in 2018. The employer also received heavy lobbying from municipal businesses and government to return to office. A big reason for that was the calculation that a lack of in office presence would cause financial damage to the downtown sector of my city.
There are many facets to this issue and none of them have to do with actual employee productivity.
From the academic studies I had to research to inform my workplace on pros/cons of remote work, that wasn’t the conclusion. I’m paraphrasing but the majority of those that self reported their own productivity highlighted an overwhelming increase in productivity.
When it came down to aggregate productivity (in jobs with quantifiable KPIs), they found moderate to significant increases in productivity as long as management adjusted their managing style to accommodate remote. This opinion differed the higher up in management that studies polled.
For my workplace specifically, they had invested multiple billions throughout the entire portfolio into longterm building leases (10+ years) and could not leave these agreements so it was easier for upper management to justify the sunken cost of leases than employee opinion or perceived/measured increases in productivity.
deleted by creator
I’m sorry but your conclusions you drew aren’t in line with reality, specifically at my organization.
Ego and sunken cost were the main reasons at least at my workplace to reimplement back to work orders.
The majority of higher level management were not able to pivot to a remote scenario and were not willing to invest in the training and additional tech infrastructure necessary to convert to remote by design. It would have required deep restructuring and loss of middle management positions.
Our organization had multiple decades long leases that were signed in 2018. The employer also received heavy lobbying from municipal businesses and government to return to office. A big reason for that was the calculation that a lack of in office presence would cause financial damage to the downtown sector of my city.
There are many facets to this issue and none of them have to do with actual employee productivity.