Will the pandemic fundamentally change how we work in the U.S?
On March 11, 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, its first such declaration since the H1N1 in 2009. Ever since then, the world has witnessed the loss of six lives. Our society has changed to an unimaginable extent before the pandemic. Work, the source of social development, has transformed online to keep social distance and employee safety. Compared to the traditional office work setting, working remotely is a brand-new experience for most people. As the pandemic approaches its end, whether the work pattern should continue is heatedly debated. According to some supporters of remote work, the pandemic could be a fortune in disguise as it introduced a better remote way of work which grants workers more flexibility and work-life balance. However, although remote work has some advantages, I think traditional in-person work will return soon because remote work has more costs than benefits. Yes, remote work is definitely more flexible, but it has, and it will negatively influence productivity.
If you only listen to the supporters, you might think that remote work will stay, but not after thorough considerations. Let’s first walkover supporter’s idea. There are indeed some employers and employees who view remote work positively. For instance, in an interview with CBS News, Karin Kimbrough claims that the pandemic allows her more flexibility in where she works, who she works for, and what she works for. Because of these benefits, she predicts that the employers would have to “cling to the flexibility” workers have demanded, and she believes flexible remote work settings will be permanent. In other words, she argues that workers will continue working remotely due to the shift of power to employers who value flexibility. Some employers support Karin’s point of view. “Working remotely has given me more space for long-term thinking and helped me spend more time with my family, which has made me happier and more productive at work,” written by the CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg. So, from the perspective of a company leader, Zuckerberg agrees with Karin that remote work boosts productivity and mental well-being.
However, to avoid survivorship bias, we should not only accept the viewpoints of supporters. Not everyone is Zuckerberg, and not everyone benefits from remote work in terms of productivity. Because capitalist societies stigmatize lack of motivation and dedication, those who become less productive tend to be more reluctant to speak out about their suffering. Indeed, there is overwhelming evidence revealing falling productivity in most industries since the office turned online. Many supervisors have complained of difficulties monitoring team project progress, partially caused by the absence of supervision.
Yongcheng Zhang is a manager in the IT industry. According to his experience, remote work has made supervisors more anxious and upset when many workers couldn’t maintain the same level of dedication at home. “After numerous conversations with my employees, I realized I have to adjust expectations and set lower standards.” Zhang attributes decreased productivity to the lack of supervision when working online. “Everyone, including me, needs encouragements and guidance to boost efficiency, and there is no adequate substitute for timely in-person feedback. We do have e-mails and zoom meetings, though,” said Zhang. In other words, it is much more difficult to supervise employees when they might be thousands of miles away. As is stated in “Supervision: Essential for productivity”: “Effective supervision plays a motivating factor that increases job satisfaction and commitment, leading to high job performance.” With the absence of “effective supervision, Zhang had no choice but to fire several employees to sustain active output, as Zhang said. Moreover, unlike supporters of remote work, such as Karin and Zuckerberg, whose belief is mostly based on subjective or anecdotal experience, Zhang’s claim is backed by statistical reports demonstrating higher separation rates in most industries since the pandemic. According to “Workplace Trend Report” from Aspire, an industry-leading HR service website, the likelihood of one getting fired within three months of employment shows a noticeable increase, from 12.29% to an astonishing 27.87 percent, coinciding with companies’ decreased satisfaction with employees from a pre-pandemic rating of 7.31 out of 10 to 5.68 out of 10 by the end of 2021. The evidence reflects companies’ frustration in falling employees’ productivity. Interestingly, this trend is much more prominent in startups and small enterprises, in which individual workers affect the company’s market competitiveness more profoundly. We should not ignore the fact that well-established industry-leading companies, which hire thousands of employees, are usually unable to track individual contributions precisely. So, flagship companies tend to be selective but accommodating with hired employers. Thus, the report could underestimate the actual decrease in productivity due to ineffective remote supervision, which suggests more significant benefits of our traditional work settings. The return of in-person work should happen very soon.
Remote work not only frustrates supervisors and employers but also exposes people to more distractions, accompanied by less motivation when working at home, which contributes to deteriorated productivity. Instead of creating a better work-life balance, distractions blur the line between work and life, leading to worse outcomes in both aspects. In research done by the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 578 structured surveys and 29 interviews were conducted to study how remote work affects employees’ productivity. Results demonstrate lower motivation and “ability to concentrate,” which indicates remote work is not as efficient as some supporters think. The paper suggests that a prominent cause is increased distractions in “flexible work settings,” which is not difficult to comprehend. Imagine working at home with babies crying and dogs barking. You woke up later than expected and struggled to catch up on work, but Netflix is just a few clicks away. Your mind begins wandering: will Seong Gi-hun survive in the next episode of Squid Game? Is my dog feeling depressed or hungry? Should I walk my dog? Oh, my baby needs more attention… In this scenario, one can easily surrender to distractions; almost no one can stay calmly focused. Even if someone can remain focused, they can perform better in the office because resisting distractions consumes willpower. Undeniably, fewer distractions exist in the office as it is tailored for efficient output and greater motivation triggered by conformity. Once in-person work returns, workers won’t struggle with interferences when working at home and can throw themselves into their jobs.
In fact, many remote work supporters admit it has sacrificed some productivity, but they might say employees have also benefitted from flexibility and better work-life balance. Yes, many workers have indeed moved elsewhere during the pandemic. It is also true that they might have adapted to a new community, in which they might even have bought new houses and have more time with their family. Admittedly, the above scenario sounds excellent, which raises a consequential contradiction: even if traditional work settings promote productivity, is it worthwhile to let people re-adapt to previous lifestyles?
The debate of whether the benefits of in-person work outweigh the loss of flexibility usually ended inconcludable since both concepts are unmeasurable. So, I would like to address the controversy from the perspective of mental health problems caused by social isolation, which also drags productivity down. In “The Implications of COVID-19 for Mental Health and Substance Use,” researchers find the pandemic has “negatively affected many people’s mental health.” Ever since the pandemic, approximately “4 in 10 adults in the U.S. have reported symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder. ” Other more common symptoms amid the pandemic include “difficulty sleeping (36%) or eating (32%),” “increases in alcohol consumption or substance use (12%),” and “worsening chronic conditions (12%).” As Aristotle stated centuries ago, “Man is by nature a social animal,” which is nowadays proved by psychological studies. A close tie with society is essential for mental well-being as we need abundant inter-personal interactions to conceptualize who we are, how we behave, and revise our worldview. Working in person will guarantee a basic level of socialization and facilitate other interactions outside of the office as people spend significantly more time outside, which boosts productivity indirectly.
Therefore, the pandemic will not fundamentally change how people work in the United States. Remote work has been proved to affect productivity due to ineffective supervision, greater exposure to distractions and less motivation, and mental health problems. We are currently witnessing many companies requiring employees to work on-site. With more and more people realizing the advantages of traditional work settings, a complete comeback of in-person work should be no distant future.
References:
The Implications of COVID-19 for Mental Health and Substance Use
SUPERVISION -ESSENTIAL TO PRODUCTIVITY
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334286138_SUPERVISION_-ESSENTIAL_TO_PRODUCTIVITY
The Great Resignation: Why more Americans are quitting their jobs than ever before
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/great-resignation-60-minutes-2022-01-10/
The Pandemic Revealed How Much We Hate Work https://time.com/6051955/work-after-covid-19/
Work Place Trends Report
https://www.weareaspire.com/insights/whitepapers-guides/workplace-trends-report
