Why companies should become „remote first“ even as the go back to the office
These articles, books and podcasts have kept me busy this week:
Pilita Clark: Why „hybrid“ working spells trouble for companies
WHAT IT SAYS: Companies that adopt a hybrid working will likely create a degraded experience for on-premise and even more for remote workers, especially because being „in the office“ is likely to be better for your career.
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: Companies need to be very careful about shifting to a hybrid model because it’s a one-way street as some people will move state or country.
BUT WAIT … The article is right in many ways. I believe „hybrid“ companies will have to think and act like „remote first“ companies if they don’t want to discourage remote workers. Financial Times 🌐, 20 September 2020.
Richard Florida: The uncertain future of corporate HQs
WHAT IT SAYS: Decisions about who will work from home, how offices will be configured and where they should be located — in superstar cities or second- or third-tier metros — requires more strategic thought than ever.
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: Community concerns over gentrification, inequality, housing and racial and economic justice have created a corporate backlash that requires companies to reconsider their location strategies.
BUT WAIT … There has been a lot of debate about how second- and third-tier metros might benefit from the remote work trend but it remains to be seen whether the „creative class“ really wants to leave the metropolis … Harvard Business Review 🌐, 18 September 2020.
Lars Vollmer: Warum sich Deutschland Homeoffice gar nicht leisten kann 🇩🇪
WHAT IT SAYS: Many tasks can be solved extremely well while WFH because they follow an established procedure. Things that have not be done already hundreds of times — i.e. real innovations — however barely happen.
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: Innovation thrives in the informal part of an organisation and is supported by serendipity or casual encounters in the workplace across hierarchies. This can hardly be replicated virtually.
BUT WAIT … Some studies say serendipity is overrated as a source of innovation. At Dropbox, we did our first fully digital hack week this year — and it did not feel less innovative than before. Capital 🌐, 23 September 2020.
One more thing …
Over at Marker, Rob Walker writes that while Slack used to be a much hyped startup, its stock performance in recent months has been weaker than for example Zoom’s.
Obviously, the facts speak for themselves but at the same time, it is not surprising that Zoom benefited more from the lockdown than Slack. As I argued elsewhere, when offices closed down, companies shifted their non-digital synchronous communications (meetings) to digital synchronous communications (video) — and Zoom was one of the main winners from this shift.
Once companies switch from „remote work“ to a truly “distributed“ organisational model to fully capture the benefits of a de-centralised workforce, synchronous communications tools like videoconferencing will — relatively speaking — become less important compared to text-based systems like Slack — that’s at least what I would expect.
What’s your view?
❗️Did you find this reading list useful? Please consider subscribing via Medium or on Telegram. And please do forward any articles, book recommendations or podcasts that you think I should be aware of!
