More than three years after the world learned a whole new way of working in the wake of lockdowns imposed in response to the pandemic, there are still plenty of managers yearning for a return to how things used to be. Seemingly oblivious to all those surveys indicating how employees would leave for another job if forced to attend the office full-time and impervious to the research showing productivity improving and stress reducing, they complain that staff are not sufficiently engaged and collaborative if not in the office.
There is, of course, something to this. Not having everybody present in one place during working hours can be difficult to manage — especially in the early days. Moreover, the fact that remote working can improve employees’ wellbeing can be attributed to them being more easily able to carry out non-work tasks, such as caring for children or older relatives, which can obviously also be distracting.
But these, and other issues, can be overcome. They just require management, albeit of a different nature from that with which most managers are familiar. They may not welcome it, but this is not something managers can ignore. As the subheading of an article in the latest issue of Rotman Management, the magazine of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, puts it, “Like it or not, remote and hybrid work environments are here to stay.” The article, an excerpt from an academic paper published in the journal Organizational Dynamics by Geoffrey Leornardelli, an associate professor of organizational behavior at Rotman, sets out three tactics designed to help improve managers’ effectiveness in this new era.
The first is to give employees greater autonomy. This might appear counter-intuitive since it is precisely the issue with which so many line managers are grappling. But Leonardelli urges managers to not worry about the blending of work and non-work life and instead free employees to do their work with fewer impediments. One of these is the requirement that employees be available to work at the same time as colleagues. Employee autonomy can be increased by making work more “asynchronous.” In other words, by restructuring work they can make it less important that one employee receives an immediate response from another.
This greater autonomy also requires not just the appropriate technological hardware, such as cameras and headphones, to enable remote team members to work effectively but also ensuring they are comfortable using it.
Leonardelli’s final element in this first tactic is to be more selective about calling team meetings. Since they are known to be deeply unpopular with so many employees of all levels and are reckoned to cost companies billions of dollars, it does not seem sensible to persevere with them unquestioningly. He suggests that they be used sparingly, such as at the outset of a project and when the work is complex. Otherwise, other forms of communication should be used and perhaps only those involved in the work being discussed should attend virtual meetings.
The second tactic is to build honest “intergroup relationships.” Noting that research on authentic leadership looks at “how leaders can create honest relationships with employees that create psychological safety and allow a true expression of the individual,” Leonardelli says that remote working means that there are fewer spontaneous opportunities for building these relationships. However, there were things that managers could do in response. For example, they should address difficulties directly. Realizing that silence and a general lack of information can be isolating and worrying for employees, managers should be open and transparent in their communications. Younger employees, in particular, are worried about the effects of isolation on their professional development, so managers need to create opportunities for training. Finally, managers can show their own vulnerability by revealing how they feel about significant events, making minor mistakes, such as forgetting to unmute at the beginning of a meeting, and introducing a touch of levity.
The final tactic is for managers to become “cultural champions.” Leonardelli points out that research indicates that people find remote work even more socially isolating than it is professionally. He adds that this is perhaps especially the case for newcomers, interns, those joining from overseas and the like. As a result, leaders have to not just define what culture means to the organization but also make it feel real to employees and help them feel connected to it. Leonardelli’s own research “shows that when people feel like they belong, they begin to spontaneously adopt the group’s characteristics and norms.” Accordingly, leaders should give serious thought to what those characteristics and norms should be.
While these tactics are attractive, it is clear that for many managers a real change of approach will be required in order to implement them. Moreover, for every problem solved another is likely to appear. For instance, it is increasingly widely acknowledged that, while remote working enables people who might otherwise have been prevented from doing so to enter the workforce, it also has the potential to discriminate against those not able to visit the workplace as often as others. There can also be bias — conscious or otherwise — against women, who, it appears, are more likely to work remotely than men.
But the reality is that, while there may be some adjustments to remote working, it is not going away — and smart managers will see this as an opportunity to think deeply about how they can lead more effectively.
Read the full article here
