The first thing to do when it comes to smart working is not to call it smart working. From the advent of the smartphone onwards we have been overwhelmed by an Orwellian Newspeak based on "smart things" and "smart concepts" where the smart label is assigned after having overloaded the original object with technology (real or only potential: think of the "smart cities"). The scam naturally lies in the fact that the term "smart" suggests an incontestably positive attribute and therefore prevents any debate on the actual goodness of the initiative and reduces the exchanges of opinions about it to the simple fandom: naive techno-optimists on the one hand, naysayers variously philosophizing on the other.
We are
therefore going to talk about something more circumscribed and therefore easily
identifiable, which I would call "agile work", that is, teleworking
from its simplest to the most flexible methods. So, we’re talking about office
work, already digitized or digitizable. Actually, I
remember that we started talking about "smart working" before the
normalization of teleworking, using the term to justify a sort of phase 2 of
the dismantling of traditional office spaces: after introducing the open space
(which is to an office as an Oktoberfest tent is to a restaurant) some
companies had the brilliant idea of eliminating workstations altogether giving
the "free for all" to the daily hoarding of chairs, desks or assorted
perches as needed but above all if and as available. Fortunately, this
barbarity didn’t take root, thanks to the advent of Internet bandwidth finally
able to reliably support connections to the corporate network, thus avoiding
having to cram the entire workforce into the office.
Teleworking
has allowed, among other things, the explosion of the presence of global (which
is a euphemism for "American") technology vendors in many
"second-tier" European countries such as Italy, where the lack of
market maturity or unsustainable bureaucracy would never have justified the
opening of a physical office.
I have been
working in this mode for almost 17 years and I have always maintained that
agile working is a challenge for management even before for employees. Since
the pre-smartworking of deregulated open spaces, these initiatives were
motivated almost exclusively by supposed economic optimizations and were
marked, organizationally speaking, by anarchy. Predictable result: total
de-responsibility of managers, moreover totally unprepared on the subject,
relative panic and reckless reactions, chaos and collapse of productivity.
Ironically, webex-based telecommuting and instant messaging have brought some
order back, while continuing to clash with managers without the faintest idea
of how to manage these new types of work groups.
We could
spend many pages describing the type of discipline required of the teleworker,
and it would certainly be useful and necessary, even though almost all
influencers, motivators, gurus and evangelists in possession of at least one
account on a social network have already expressed themselves in this regard.
Let's just say that the teleworker is precisely required the discipline to
reliably follow a working time all in all "standard", to equip
himself with a workstation all in all "standard", and to present
himself on video in a "standard" outfit, combining these general
requests with the benefits of the flexibility of this way of working.
I find it
more interesting, however, and at the same time less explored by the gurus/motivators
mentioned above, to highlight the challenges that agile working presents to
managers and leaders of work groups. Unfortunately, periodically I still read,
with discouragement, someone say that without work in presence "it is not
possible to create team spirit" or it is not possible to achieve high
levels of productivity or creativity. Reality tells us instead that these
things are possible, and those who claim otherwise do so only because they do
not have the imagination or skills to picture a way of managing an office other
than the pre-Internet one.
The leader
of the "agile" or "hybrid" working group is required not
only an excellent understanding of the company's objectives (something that
unfortunately is not obvious even among "traditional" managers), but superior
communication skills and an excellent mastery of the technological
tools available, accompanied, ideally, by direct experience of agile
work. The benefit you receive in
return is a sharp increase in team productivity.
At this
point it is necessary to spend a few words on the term "hybrid",
which is also somewhat abused. By "hybrid" work I mean two dimensions
of the same phenomenon: the first refers to the working methods of the
employee, who sometimes works from home, sometimes in the office, sometimes in
coworking spaces, sometimes by the customer, sometimes perched on an improvised
desk at the airport or at the bar. The second refers to companies where part of
the workforce mainly uses the remote modes described above, and another part
works mainly in the office in "traditional" mode.
The team
leader inserted in these "hybrid" environments must therefore on the
one hand adapt their management and communication methods to the
"nomadic" and individual reality of remote workers and on the other
hand must keep the communication channels to and from the sedentary and
community world of offices open and lively. Remote workers need - of course -
regular face-to-face meetings, but these acquire a particular importance: they
cannot be reduced to simply being together in the same place. As disruptive
elements of routine, they must be associated with specific goals and content,
whether related to business, leisure, or a mix of both. The value provided by
in-person events must be greater than the breaking of routine and temporary
loss of the flexibility provided by teleworking. Similarly, the risk of
disconnecting the "office tribe" from that of teleworkers must be
avoided: unfortunately it is not uncommon for company managers to be those who
adopt the most traditional working methods, often going to the office and
giving life to the so-called "corridor" or "coffee machine"
management methods based on the informal interactions possible in a shared
environment. While acknowledging the obvious effectiveness of this type of
communication, it carries with it two serious risks: the first is that of
taking over more formal relationships, eventually generating confusion and
misunderstanding; The second is to exclude teleworkers from decision-making
flows. It is therefore evident that the success of hybrid workplaces is borne
even more by the "traditional" senior executives who have remained in
the office than the leaders of teleworker teams.
Unfortunately,
I don't see any particularly innovative changes in managing the "new
normal" of post-pandemic agile working. "Smart working" is
increasingly synonymous with fixed schemes pre-packaged and parachuted on
workers, more similar to the vertical / horizontal part-time of the past than
to an "agile" job. Very common phrases such as "my company lets
me do two days of smart working" are dramatic oxymorons that have the
effect of debasing the practice of teleworking, cancelling the benefits of the
flexible approach, and depriving managers of the real management of their
teams. Adding up these effects, the results will be, at best, the elimination
of the increase in productivity that would have been possible thanks to true
flexible work, and in many cases,
knowing the Italian character, a
mountain of grumbling and discussions between those who prefer two days in
smart and three in the office and those who side with three in smart and two in
the office.
The risk we
run in the near future is therefore that for simple laziness and unpreparedness
many companies will end up going back to indulging in the luxury of throwing
hours on commuting every day that could instead be dedicated to the well-being
of employees. The explosion of availability of coworking environments could be
the sad conclusion of this journey or the first step towards a new way of
making community at work.
The other
variable, for me imponderable (but you can find countless peremptory opinions
about it on any social network), is the approach to agile work of the workers
themselves. Is there really a "generation" of workers who see
telework as an acquired right and a foregone characteristic of any workplace?
And if it exists, will it have the strength and the possibility to make its
voice heard?
Commenti