I’ve long devoured news and analysis related to the concept of remote and hybrid work…and not just during these crazy pandemic times. I’ve been a hybrid worker for the entirety of my career these past 16 years, and, particularly over the past decade, more “remote” than “hybrid.” I’ve stepped into an office only a handful of times since March 2020. Besides my own experiences with the hybrid work, the Future of Work Exchange is committed to helping businesses and workers better understand the implications of such a model, the benefits, how to structure a hybrid infrastructure, and, of course, how the hybrid workplace factors into the digitization of work.
A recent New York Times article by Elizabeth Spiers, former editor in chief of The New York Observer and the founding editor of Gawker, argues that we, as both leaders and workers, have lost some semblance of “work” with it becoming “too casual” over the past two years. “What We Lose When Work Gets Too Casual” highlights that:
“There are trade-offs, though. The loss of workplace formalities like fixed start and stop times, managerial hierarchies with clear pathways for advancement and professional norms that create boundaries between personal and professionally acceptable behavior only hurt workers. Though the pandemic-era transformation of white-collar work seems empowering at first, we should not be deceived: Many of these changes mostly benefit employers.”
Spiers further writes that employers can take advantage of an environment in which the lack of shift formality means that workers will pump extra hours into their work and projects without the extra pay (for salaried employees, of course). This is, in fact, a common drawback to the hybrid model, in which workers cannot seemingly “unplug” from their work and suffer burnout, anxiety, and stress.
It’s often too easy for those work remotely to get caught up in work, to subconsciously allow personal and professional worlds to collide, and to let “casual work culture” become the foundation of a remote working environment. The office becomes home, and the home becomes the offices, Spiers writes. She’s not wrong, as for those white-collar employees that have been working remotely for a lengthy period of time, there is very little crossover between the personal and professional arenas. We stare at our phones checking email, keep our laptops within reach, and spend late nights toiling away. Working at 11pm is just as common as dialing into a video call at 11am.
Spiers’ points are made with good intentions, and she focuses on the fact that this setup mainly benefits the employers. What she is missing, however, is the inherent flexibility that is baked into the hybrid work model. This is what workers crave, it’s what they desire. They want to be able to do the things they want to do without having the pressure of in-person work, long commutes, and endless in-person meetings.
However, there is one idea, above all else, that needs to be taken into consideration. It’s the one driving factor that separates remote work in 2022 vs. remote work in the early months of the pandemic. Businesses must enable their employees with the necessary strategies, solutions, and tools to succeed. Working remotely (or in a hybrid model) does just that, and it’s the most critical argument here. Too much of a “casual” feel to work doesn’t mean that work is being negatively impacted nor does it mean that all remote workers will succumb to burnout (as Spiers writes: “Their personal needs don’t get met because work has so invaded their personal lives that there is no dedicated time for non-work life.”).
Remote work burnout is an issue, for sure. We’ve written about it here on the Future of Work Exchange (rather recently, too!). And I won’t be a hypocrite here: there are many weeks that I’m hitting 70 or 80 hours (or more), as are many of you reading this article. There are times when I sacrifice my personal or family time for work. However, the flexibility will always outweigh whatever imbalances pop up from time-to-time. The fact that I can make breakfast for my kids in the morning or say hi to them in the afternoon instead of being locked in an office? I would gladly take some of those late nights and long weeks for the ability to do these things. It’s a beneficial trade-off, as is the fact that I gain two hours not spending on commutes everyday; I can take the dog for a walk if I have an hour break, or schedule a doctor’s appointment without having to take an entire day off.
The other big point Spiers made in her article is that employers have the ability to “punt” on advancement conversations due to the “informal” environment of remote and hybrid workplaces. She argues that junior and less experienced employees may take on additional work without a clear path to promotions and advancement. While this may be the case in some organizations, I can confidently say that not all business leaders think this way.
The most glaring omission in Spiers’ article is this: she doesn’t mention the “Talent Revolution” happening today, nor the fact that the so-called “Great Resignation” is occurring because of a lack of flexibility within the workplace. Tens of millions of workers have left their roles because of lack of these dynamic benefits, so much so that business leaders are actively trying to configure new ways to find, engage, and source talent based on the overall culture and flexibility of the enterprise itself.
Work may be becoming more casual, but that’s not a bad thing.
