The Blended Workforce: Productivity Revolution?

In 2020 the world undertook a global experiment in remote working. It was broadly successful, in that the devastation to the economy was partially mitigated, with Zoom reporting that the UK alone saved 550,00 jobs due to a successful transition to online working. In the past few years, we have had the inevitable backlash, with big name firms requiring their staff to come back to the office: McKinsey, Amazon, Santander, to name a few. Employers are wondering where this will settle, and weighing up the pros and cons. But should we be framing the debate around wellbeing and employee motivation, or should the focus be productivity?

Remote working has been transformational for neurodivergent people. In fact, it is the most popular disability adjustment, bar none. We’ve been asking for it for decades, and since the pandemic it has been much harder to turn us down. We like it for several reasons, all of which relate directly to productivity. Those of us with sensory sensitivity (which is most of us, plus anyone dealing with fatigue, anxiety or pain) find that commuting dramatically drains our reserves. We can start our day on a deficit. Then, a busy office or depot, makes it more difficult for us to concentrate. As a result, we make more mistakes, we are slower than we would like. Background noise is like a constant niggle, we can’t screen it off very easily because we literally hear things as loud, feel things more intensely.

It also allows us to work at our own pace. ADHDers like a blend – an inspirational, collaborative exchange of ideas and creativity at a fast pace, but then a quiet place to retreat to so that we can regroup and write up. We can engage in distraction tasks while we are processing our thoughts, and then sit down to complete a report in double quick time because we’ve thought it all through. Again, this is way more productive than trying to force us into a steady, consistent pace.

47% of remote workers report improvements in wellbeing and 78% report improvements in work/life balance. This seems like a no-brainer, but there are caveats driving the corporate backlash.

Firstly, the improvements in wellbeing and work/life balance are highly dependent on context. In general, older workers who have established careers and have more space at home have a much more positive experience than younger workers who need access to mentoring and have smaller spaces at home. This limits productivity.

Secondly, too much working from home can lead to time blindness and isolation. Fears that people think badly of you can be exacerbated by short email communication and perfunctory video calls, and this will compromise performance while we ruminate or get into gossip behind the scenes..

Lastly, the work/life balance crashes into the “always on” culture, where we can’t mentally switch off because work is in our space. Our laptops are staring at us if we don’t have a spare office where we can shut the door. It’s easily to slip back into work mode. While that might seem like more hours, so more work, academic reviews suggest that overworking does not lead to better outcomes and that short term gain is long term pain.

The smart companies are realizing that any “one size fits all” approach is doomed. People are diverse, employees have different needs and contexts. Progressive, performance-focused HR is working out the details of how we manage flexibility and fairness. We need to differentiate and set up systems that enable team camaraderie and informal knowledge sharing in a remote workforce.

Other employers are worried about what their employees are getting up to on their own. They don’t trust their workers and it shows. This culture breeds mistrust across the hierarchy and dismantles psychological safety. If we are paying well, resourcing well and running an engaging culture, people will naturally want to stay with us and deliver for us. Their optimum performance might be contingent on a blended week, with autonomy over their routine.

The twenty-first century has, so far, been characterized by a move away from standardization to personalization. We have realized, in medicine, that giving everyone the same dose of the same drug that works for most people is a blunt approach, and that by adjusting protocols to match gender, size, age, genetic factors, we can get better outcomes. It is nothing short of a revolution in medicine.

The same is true of the workforce. Yes, we need to work on our systems because it feels chaotic right now. But we CAN work on systems. If the last twenty years has taught us anything it is the power of technology to solve problems. The blended workforce could be a productivity revolution, if we stop playing petty power and control games and start measuring work output objectively.

To read more of Professor Nancy Doyle’s Forbes articles, click here