The pandemic drove employers to allow and enable broad-scale work from home (WFH). Now, as the impact of COVID-19 dissipates, some employers are insisting on a return to office (RTO). This has not gone down well with all employees – and many are voting with their feet.
For certain employers, a RTO makes sense: many brick-and-mortar retail and manufacturing environments just cannot operate with everyone working from home. However, for many others, the rationale behind an RTO requirement is less clear-cut.
This largely applies to managed service providers (MSPs). An MSP can carry out much of its work remotely—provisioning virtual resources and services, conducting root cause analysis (RCA), and handling most sales, accounts, and customer support just as effectively with remote staff as with those on-site.
RTO may create stress and leads to lost revenue
There are many things wrong with working from the office, starting with the need to commute. Commuting generally wastes time – employees don’t often carry out work-related activities while traveling to and from work, nor can they attend to much of their own activities. It is expensive dead time, as far as the employee is concerned – generally unpaid and non-productive.
For those who need to be at home more often, such as to care for children or aging family members, RTO can create stresses that are hard to manage. The costs of childcare or health coverage can quickly outweigh any benefit of the salary the employer offers.
The arguments used by proponents of RTO are often deceptive. The most common argument is that people working from home don’t work the hours they are contracted for. Instead, they sidetrack themselves with home activities, playing computer games, or avoiding work.
New ways to measure productivity are needed
This viewpoint simply indicates a lack of using the correct metrics to measure an employee’s effectiveness. Two employees, each working a full eight-hour day, are not guaranteed to be equally productive. However, if the metric was based on productivity, then things would become clearer.
For example, if help desk staff are measured by how many calls they resolve to the customer’s satisfaction, it provides a more meaningful metric. This approach is far better than simply acknowledging that the person sat at their desk for eight hours. This is pretty much how salespeople have been measured, anyway – although this tends to directly impact their pay based on a base + commission package. I would advise against using such packages for non-sales staff. Instead, use the metrics to assess their overall productivity, identify areas where they may need help becoming more productive, or decide if you should redeploy them or remove them from employment.
Collaboration tools are key to success
The next argument tends to be around how effective those WFH can be. The argument goes that individuals are not in an environment where they can easily ask for guidance and help from those around them. While this is correct at a basic level, it highlights a lack of suitable tools and systems for employees to interact virtually. It also points to the absence of resources for identifying previous solutions to issues, and so on. Suitable information-sharing and collaboration systems are all that organizations need—many of which MSPs already sell.
Another argument concerns the lack of suitable equipment for those working from home. Laptops, printers, and phone systems may not meet the employee’s task needs effectively. A simple answer is for the employer to provide the right systems so the employee can carry out the tasks they are hired for. In many cases, this could well be just a device that can connect to a secure virtual desktop in the employer’s environment, where the employee can then carry out their work.
Tailoring hybrid work for the employee
Next, we are left with one argument that holds some weight: the possible impacts of no physical interactions for those working in isolation from home. This factor may affect their overall well-being and work dynamics.
Here, there may well be a need for hybrid working – sometimes working from home combined with time in the office. I would prefer the mix to adapt to the employee’s needs, rather than the employer dictating it. Some employees will require more time with physical people around them than others – one size does not fit all.
For MSPs, there will be certain use cases where a different approach will be required. Modern entry systems can provide secure access for visitors, allowing customer engineers into specific areas. However, having someone available to assist with non-technical issues, like coffee machines or restroom locations, can help create a better environment. Likewise, someone should be there to ensure the environment looks clean throughout the day.
Retaining top talent
At the technical level, teams cannot implement new physical equipment remotely. However, teams will generally plan this activity, and engineers can handle the delivery, unpacking, installation, and provisioning of the new equipment when needed. Unplanned issues, such as equipment failure, may need on-call engineers to be available who are close to the data center. Regard such callouts as exceptions and provide additional pay to cover travel time, costs, and so on.
Photo: Jag_cz / Shutterstock
