As a social business, we measure the impact of our work against clear social objectives, as well financial ones. Here’s a summary of our success.
By Melissa Jamieson, CEO, Timewise
Here at Timewise, we are proud to be a social business. We invest our profits back into our work, creating a virtuous circle in which we build on the insights we’ve gained to deliver better, more targeted solutions for our clients. And we share our learnings as widely as possible, to help drive change within and across as many sectors as possible.
As part of our social model, we set ourselves a suite of objectives against which we monitor the impact we’re having on businesses and individuals. And three years ago, we set some particularly ambitious goals, and committed to tracking our performance against them over time.
The outcomes are clear – and are set out in our latest social impact report , which also includes case studies and other feedback from businesses and individuals. But the topline summary is that we smashed our targets on all five measures.
For example, having set ourselves the challenge of working with 100 employers to influence their flex strategies and practice, we collaborated with 151. Having aimed to positively impact the lives of 1 million people through greater access to flexible working, we reached 1.7 million. And having a target of widening access to flexible working at the point of hire by posting 25,000 jobs on Timewise Jobs, we actually posted over 42,000.
So what does all this mean, overall? It means more individuals who want or need to work flexibly have been able to find a job to match their circumstances. For many people, such as those who are carers or have health conditions, this flexibility can be the difference between working or not. This in turn has a positive impact on societal issues such as child poverty.
It also means that more businesses now understand the role that flexible working plays within issues like talent attraction, retention, well-being and inclusion – and critically, understand what to do about it.
The result is a win-win-win scenario which benefits businesses and candidates alike. It increases the options for new candidates, and makes it easier for those already in work to move or progress, taking their flexibility with them. And it supports businesses to find, keep and nurture talented individuals, who are happier, healthier and more productive at work.
We’re publishing this report at a time of great uncertainty. The jobs market is hugely unsettled; companies are battling with a skills crisis, and with a marked candidate shortage. And the cost-of-living crisis is making it more important than ever that we help as many people as possible find work that fits with their lives.
So, having proved over the last three years that our work has measurable impact, we want to see action on a greater scale. And we’re calling for a shared commitment from businesses, government and social funders to invest in innovative solutions that will help make good flexible work available to all.
We need government to build an infrastructure that supports flexible options. We need businesses to develop change programmes that create the right flexible jobs for their structure and their people. And we need social funders to get behind organisations like ours, so we can explore what works and share our learnings to drive wider change.
We’re here to help, in an advisory or a practical capacity; please get in touch if you’d like to know more. In the meantime, having smashed our three-year targets, we’re evolving our approach and developing a new suite of goals that match where we are now. We’ll update you all about this in the next few months; watch this space.
Published October 2022
In July 2021, we published the report into our Construction Pioneers Pilot, and it caused quite a stir. The 18-month programme was carried out in partnership with Build UK and four pioneer firms – BAM Construct, BAM Nuttall, Skanska UK and Wilmot Dixon – and set out to challenge the concept that frontline site-based roles were incompatible with flexible working. The outcomes were clear; and overnight, some long-held assumptions were overturned.
The pilot demonstrated that flexible working CAN be implemented on construction sites, without negatively affecting budgets or delivery. It highlighted the positive impact of flexible working on workers’ sense of well-being and work-life balance. It also set out the benefits of taking a team-based approach to working patterns, and demonstrated that a culture which accepts, and champions, flexible workers, is better for everyone involved.
But for us, and for our pilot colleagues, that wasn’t the end of the story. Flexible working is a long-term change; it takes time to embed it within an organisation, and progress needs to be tracked to get a clear picture of what works.
So we agreed to come back after a year and review the situation. Were the positive outcomes sustainable, and has anything else changed for the better? What still needs to be tackled? And what can the rest of the industry learn from all this? Our One Year On Review holds the answers.
To start with, the continuing positive impact on employees is clear. All four firms agreed that even small changes to ways of working were helping their staff better manage the challenges of day-to-day life, taking away potential problems that could increase stress.
The employees we interviewed also felt that they were more trusted and better understood, and that it was easier to discuss flexible working and make changes in a collaborative way with their managers. The managers themselves felt they were more open to trying out new ways of working, recognising that if it benefits their teams, it benefits the business too. That’s quite a culture shift.
And critically there was new evidence, from interviews and HR feedback, of a reduction in sickness absence. This is particularly notable in comparison to the rest of the construction industry, in which sickness absence is on the rise. All four participating firms believe that flexible working has contributed to this reduction, and given that one of our initial aims was to tackle the industry’s poor mental health and well-being record, it’s a welcome development.
Additionally, the firms have reported increased productivity levels, which they feel is the result of having a happier workforce who are better able to manage their commitments outside of work. And all this is still being delivered without any negative impact on either budget or delivery.
A further positive outcome is that our pioneer firms are now so confident about the value of flexible working that they have felt able to offer it from the point of hire. This is rare within construction, and likely to seriously improve the industry’s gender pay gap.
The review also noted some areas where there is more work to be done. There’s still a need for more consistency in management practice across the firms, and more time needs to be spent exploring other forms of flexible working. Part-time work, in particular, is still rare to the point of invisibility, particularly for on-site roles.
It also highlighted the as-yet-missed opportunity of influencing other parts of the supply chain; these new attitudes towards flexible working need to ripple downwards to sub-contracted workers, and upwards to clients too.
Overall, the evidence clearly suggests that our pioneers are reaping the rewards of their flexible working trial. They are also benefitting from this review, which has given them a forum to reflect on what’s working, within and across the four firms, and refine their plans accordingly.
What’s more, this model offers real benefits for the whole sector. Why? Because our initial pilot, and this one year on review, provide a clear roadmap for change. They set out what needs to be done, offer proof of concept for flexible working, and show what’s up for grabs for others who are willing to trial it for themselves.
It’s already gathering momentum; following our initial report a year ago, we’ve been engaged by a number of other firms who are keen to move forwards with flexible working, including Sir Robert McAlpine, Kier and Balfour Beatty. It’s our expectation that the further proof provided by this review will see even more firms taking action.
And why wouldn’t they? The evidence from this programme is pretty conclusive; it’s also backed up by our own cross-sector research, which has indicated that a flexible working trial which reduces sickness absence by one day per person per year generates a positive ROI.
In the words of Suzannah Nichol MBE, CEO of Build UK, “With such positive results, particularly around diversity and well-being, Build UK will continue to champion flexible working and I would encourage other industry organisations to do so too. If you aren’t already having the flexible working conversation within your business, it is definitely one worth starting – I promise you won’t regret it.”
Published July 2022
It seems pretty clear that hybrid is the new normal. A June 2022 survey from the CIPD noted that 78% of organisations now offer hybrid working, in a mix of formal and informal arrangements. And spring 2022 ONS data showed that 84% of employees who worked from home during the pandemic plan to continue working in a hybrid way.
Here at Timewise, we see the increase in hybrid working as a hugely positive thing. We, like many organisations, believe that it offers huge benefits for employers and employees alike (as long as it is properly implemented, of course).
But an unexpected side-effect of hybrid’s increasing popularity is that it’s becoming conflated with flexible working in general. In the media, in conversations, in focus groups, people are using the phrase flexible working when what they mean is hybrid working.
To give just one example of many, in a recent discussion we held with a group of frontline workers, a participant stated that “Flexible working won’t work for us – we can’t do our job from home”.
So, what’s the problem here? Well, firstly, it’s just not accurate to conflate the two. Hybrid working is essentially place-based flex – giving people the opportunity to work across different locations. This is a subset of flexible working, which also includes time-based flex – such as part-time, job sharing, compressed hours and flexible start and finish times, as well as more unusual arrangements such as term-time only contracts.
And while place-based flex is liberating and beneficial for many, it doesn’t work for everyone. There are many people for whom being able to work fewer days is the only way they can work at all. Parents, carers, people with physical or mental health issues… for some, working a full week, even if partially from home, just isn’t feasible.
Additionally, there are many roles for which working from home isn’t an option at all. Most frontline workers, such as nurses, teachers, retail assistants and on-site construction workers, generally have to be at their workplace to work. But they may still need flexibility, and if they don’t get it, they may leave; in secondary schools, for example, 1 in 5 teachers who leave the profession do so to take up a part-time role elsewhere.
For these groups, offering time-based flexibility is key. School timetables can be tweaked to accommodate part-time employees or staggered start and finish times; rotas and shift patterns can be designed to accommodate reduced hours. It requires leadership, job design skills and a team-based approach, but it can be done successfully.
However, the confusion between flex and hybrid means that companies which are allowing a blend of in office and WFH can assume they’ve ‘got flex done’. They therefore may not invest enough time in exploring and facilitating time-based flexible working options.
That’s a bad business decision, particularly in a skills crisis, because offering time-based flex as well as place-based flex allows companies to widen their recruitment talent pool and keep hold of employees for longer. It helps them boost employee wellbeing, and develop a more diverse workforce, which reflects wider society and avoids issues around groupthink. It also, all the evidence suggests, helps close the gender pay gap.
And in organisations with both frontline and office-based staff, it also counters the development of a two-tier workforce, in which only those in office-based roles have access to flexible working.
The other thing to note is that time-based flex and place-based flex aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s possible to have a part-time role that is executed in a hybrid way; for example, working four days per week, of which one is from home. For many people, that’s the best of both worlds; for companies who offer it, it’s a powerful lever.
So, our advice is simple. Get clear on the difference between hybrid working and flexible working, and avoid conflating the two. Explore all the different time-based and place-based options, and offer those which are suitable for your organisation. And if you spot someone talking about flex when they really just mean hybrid, it probably wouldn’t hurt to call it out.
Published July 2022
The impact of the pandemic on the barriers to flexible and remote working has been a largely positive one, with leaders and managers seeing for themselves that employees can work effectively and productively when not tied to the office. However, there’s another barrier that has also come crashing down, and this time it’s a problem: the barrier between work and home.
Throughout 2020 and into this year, there have been a range of reports suggesting that employees are suffering from work creep – in which their working hours spill over into the evenings and weekends. Indeed, in an April 2021 poll by Opinium, 32% of remote workers said they find it hard to switch off from work, and 30% reported working more unpaid hours than before the pandemic.
The Irish government has responded by writing the right to disconnect into an official code of practice, and the union Prospect is calling for it to be written into UK law, describing the blurred boundary between home and work as ”the dark side of remote working”. So, are they right? Do we need legislation to protect employees from work creep – or are there other, better ways of tackling it?
Here at Timewise, we believe it’s critical to get this right; if the hybrid model is to be a long-term success, we do need to encourage and empower people to manage their working-from-home time.
However, we’re also of the view that broad brush, right to disconnect legislation isn’t the right way to go. After all, the point about flexible working is that people can flex their hours to suit their needs. Choice is important; if some people prefer to work in the evenings, perhaps as a trade-off for a later start or an afternoon walk, they shouldn’t be prevented from doing so.
Instead, we believe the onus should be on leaders and managers to make sure they are aware of people working consistently outside their normal hours, and then seek to understand whether it is out of choice or necessity.
During lockdown, the fact that children were not at school played a big part, as parents restructured their working hours to support home schooling. But in more normal circumstances, there are three broad reasons why employees might be working long hours:
1. Workload issues
Given that 1 in 3 employees say they have too much work, it may be that the individual is struggling to deal with an excessive workload or unrealistic time pressure. They may need extra support to make their workload more manageable, or help them prioritise.
This may involve taking a whole team perspective, to see whether the work could be shared out more fairly. But certainly, helping someone feel supported through a particularly pressured time will have a positive effect on their motivation, commitment and mental wellbeing
2. Performance issues
If the workload is not excessive, but there is still evidence of regular long hours, it may be that there is an underlying performance issue. Perhaps the employee doesn’t have the skills and support they need to deliver. Or they may be struggling with a personal or health issue which is affecting their ability to complete the required tasks.
It’s important to address these issues rather than let the situation fester, and risk ending up in a downward spiral with long hours continuing to negatively affect performance.
3. Culture issues
This is a tougher nut to crack – but it is one that needs cracking, not just to deal with work creep, but also to support successful hybrid working, employee engagement and wellbeing. Attitudes to work-life balance have really shifted as a result of the pandemic, and forward-looking leaders are making sure they have a culture to match.
The fact is, workplaces, or teams, which have an ‘always on’ culture, in which employees are expected to respond to emails and calls at any time of the day, and to deliver to unmanageable timescales, are not healthy places to be. They won’t get the best out of their people, and nor will they be viewed by brilliant candidates as a viable next step.
Leaders whose organisations veer towards this kind of culture need to act swiftly to turn things around. They need to clarify what’s expected of their staff, and set protocols around how and when people contact each other (Zoom-free Friday afternoons and avoiding sending out-of-hours emails are ways to tackle this that are being widely discussed).
They also need to make sure that line managers are placing realistic expectations on their direct reports, and have the skills to look after any who might be struggling in the ways set out above. And, perhaps most important of all, they need to lead by example, switching off themselves and being seen to do so, instead of firing out emails at all hours and making others feel pressured to do the same.
So if you spot what looks like work creep in your organisation, the steps are clear: call it out, work out why it’s happening and take steps to address it. Don’t just accept it; the chances are it’s a symptom of a bigger problem that won’t go away on its own.
And if you feel you need additional support with embracing flexible working to support a good work-life balance, we’re here to help; do get in touch.
Published May 2021
It’s fair to say that introducing flexible working in schools is more challenging than in many other sectors. As we previously explained in our report, Building flexibility into secondary schools, there are a number of barriers that have slowed progress in this area, including the logistics of timetabling, the need for teachers to be student-facing, and other cultural and attitudinal factors.
But the case for change is clear: the lack of part-time and flexible roles has been identified as a key reason behind the teaching brain drain. It also makes it harder to attract talented people to the profession, and to encourage them to return after a career break.
And whilst the pandemic has created huge pressures for school leaders and staff, from the cancellation of external exams to the need to create a safe environment for staff and students to return to, it’s undeniable that it has also opened up opportunities to rethink how things are done. Furthermore, as in most sectors, it has encouraged employers to increase their focus on staff wellbeing, and employees to evaluate their work life balance, and seek out ways to make it better.
We have long been interested in encouraging flexible working in schools, and are part-way through an action research project with three MATS. This will see us exploring the barriers to flexibility in more depth, and looking at how the positive experiences schools have gained during the pandemic can be taken forward. We’ll follow this up by designing flexible roles that can work around or overcome these barriers, and pilot them within schools.
As always, we will share our learnings during and at the end of this project, so all schools can benefit. But we are also really keen to give school leaders and HR teams the support they need to get started right now. So we have created a bank of resources to do just that, by:
We have also pulled out some of the key questions schools have asked us about implementing flexible working, and answered them in more detail.
We do hope you find these resources useful, and are able to build on them to create new, better opportunities for flexible working within your school. If you would like to explore the possibility of working with us to progress your plans, do please get in touch.
By Melissa Jamieson, CEO, Timewise
The pandemic-driven focus on flexible and hybrid working is undoubtedly a good thing. Perceived barriers to the concept of flexibility have come crashing down in many organisations; evidence from the CIPD suggests that productivity and wellbeing have improved in many cases. And while we mustn’t ignore the huge challenges created by lockdown, particularly for those juggling family life and work, the overall sense is that many workplaces are undergoing serious transformation.
Indeed, there is no shortage of examples of organisations announcing big changes, from law firm A&O’s news that 40% of their work will be done remotely post-pandemic, to PwC’s ‘Deal’, which includes the freedom for employees to adapt their start and finish times or other parts of their working pattern. Nationwide, BP, Aviva, Vodafone… the list goes on.
But so far, within all the news about post-pandemic changes, there has been little, if anything, about part-time. So while organisations are widening their employees’ ability to work where and when they choose, they are not offering the same opportunities regarding the third pillar of flexible working: how much people work.
The immediate question, of course, is does this matter? If hybrid working is popular with employees, and employers are gearing up to deliver it, do we need to worry about part-time?
In fact, it’s a real issue, with a range of consequences:
Left unchecked, then, this lack of focus on part-time roles will have an impact on workplace issues such as diversity and the gender pay gap, as well as societal ones including in-work poverty and social inequality.
But we’re not suggesting that hybrid working should be put on the back burner; we’re all for it, and are helping many organisations get it right. We’re simply saying that part-time is an equally valid arrangement, which should be included in any re-evaluation of the workplace. In the wake of the pandemic, in which the groups that traditionally need part-time the most have been the hardest hit, considering the future of work at a strategic level within your business is more important than ever.
So, for companies who recognise the importance of including or increasing part-time opportunities alongside full-time flex, what are the next steps? Here are some starting points for leaders and HR teams:
We’re facing a fantastic opportunity here to rework the way we recruit and employ people, for the better. But let’s make sure that this transformation is future-proof and inclusive, by putting part-time front and centre.
Published April 2021
If there is one topic that is occupying the headspace of business leaders and their HR teams more than any other right now, it’s hybrid working. Most companies are grappling with how they will transition out of the pandemic, seeking to build on what has worked well and overcome the issues they have encountered.
And while there seems to be a general agreement that hybrid working IS the way forward for most corporate companies, and that it will create a huge number of opportunities for companies and their employees, implementation feels complex. As one of our clients has noted, in some ways having everyone working from home is easier to manage; it’s developing the next step, and making it stick, which will be a real challenge.
With this in mind, I recently co-hosted a roundtable for Timewise Partners, in which we explored the topic, supported by two of our longstanding corporate partners, who shared their hybrid working advice and insights with us. Here, in Part 1 of the highlights, we look at their approach to creating the principles on which to build a successful model.
Our speakers began by noting that while the change we are going through is unprecedented in modern times, many haven’t grasped just how fundamentally it is altering workplace norms. They also spoke of the need for organisations to agree principles for development before looking into implementation.
All agreed on the importance of allowing all members of the organisation to have input into any changes, asking what they have missed during lockdown, and what they want to build into any new ways of working. One cited a survey of 23,000 UK staff which has pointed towards a model of 2-3 days in the main office per week, with the remainder spread across client sites, at home or remotely.
Among the principles discussed were:
Our speakers then explored the best way to develop a model which is in line what teams need to succeed on a day-to-day basis.
One of our partners explained their pre-pandemic approach, which was based on employees having autonomy around how, where and when they worked. Their view was that hybrid working is an extension of this autonomy, but that teams need support and leadership to help them develop an inclusive environment in which they can continue to collaborate.
The speakers then discussed whether it is better to have a company-wide vision for hybrid working, which teams are expected to work to, or to empower individual teams to find their best way forward. Their insights included:
Take a look at Part 2 of the highlights from this session, which will focus on how to equip your employees to succeed within a hybrid model, and to ensure that it is fair and inclusive.
In the meantime, if you need more hybrid working advice, take a look at our hybrid working workshops, or get in touch to find out more about our bespoke consultancy services.
Published April 2021
By Melissa Buntine, Principal Consultant
2020 really was a remarkable year, which saw more change in the context of how work is done than the last few decades. More people worked from home than ever before, with many long-held objections disappearing overnight as organisations were forced to adapt to a remote working model.
And while no one would suggest that the circumstances were ideal – an emergency response to a global crisis is not the best way to implement new working practices – there is no question that it has caused a rethink in how people work. In particular, it has created and accelerated a move towards a hybrid model. We’re facing an opportunity to create an exciting new way of working – but we need to get it right.
I recently co-hosted a session for a group of local authorities, in which we explored the risks and opportunities around hybrid working, and heard insights from three Timewise Accredited Partners about how they are approaching it. Here are the highlights.
Our attendees noted a number of benefits that hybrid working can bring, when implemented carefully:
However, as the pandemic showed, there are some potential issues that local authorities need to avoid when designing and delivering hybrid working:
Our speakers also explored some of the issues in more detail, suggesting solutions based on their own experience:
‘’There is flex in every role and it is about control and input. You may not be able to offer everyone home working, but you can still offer additional support.’’
‘’We are designing and delivering a new way of working that is not based on HR coming up with what is best, but on a future designed by staff for staff.’’
‘’Encourage great managers to codify what they do well and pass it across in peer to peer learning.”
‘’Transitioning back to where we were before is a wasted opportunity.’’
To finish, here are some final words of advice from our Partners for other local authorities:
“Experiment. Get senior managers on board, then involve people in testing and trying things out, rather than just implementing top-down change without collaboration.”
“Remember to mentor key groups (such as BAME employees or those with health conditions) to support inclusivity, and to understand and close any gaps in provision or experience.”
“Enable consistency by providing extra support to teams which are less adept at flexible working.”
If you would like to know more about becoming a Timewise Partner, please contact melissa.buntine@timewise.co.uk.
Published May 2021
By Melissa Jamieson, CEO, Timewise
No one would argue that 2020 was a straightforward example of flexible working in action; it was more like a global experiment in how to cope when work and home collide. But nonetheless, the pandemic-led exploration of flexible and hybrid arrangements has overcome some of the perceived barriers, highlighted some of the positives, and taught a few lessons, leaving employers and employees with a better understanding of what’s possible.
As a result, any organisation which prioritises equality, diversity and inclusion, work-life balance, employer brand and talent retention and recruitment, will be seeking to ensure that their flexible working offer is up to scratch. So far, so good. The problem comes when they then assume that it’s a people issue, which can be left to HR alone.
Flexible and hybrid working touch all parts of the business
The fact is, flexible working isn’t a plaster that can be used to fix D&I issues or close recruitment gaps, and nor is it a knee-jerk response to lockdown that will soon revert to ‘normal’. Flexible and hybrid working are here to stay, and need to be considered as part of long-term, post-Covid, organisational planning.
They feed into the people strategy, of course; but they also touch wider company issues, from real estate and management structures to company brand and the bottom line. And, most importantly, they will only thrive within a flexible culture – and that needs to be led from the top, backed by an investment in time and training that will empower teams to deliver.
So, what do leaders need to do to make sure that flexible working is properly embedded in their organisation? Here are some key considerations that need board-level attention.
There are a number of questions that business leaders need to ask themselves before getting started. What do we mean by flexible and hybrid working? What are we hoping to achieve by implementing them? How can we ensure a fair approach that matches different needs and circumstances? Are there any limits to what we can or would want to offer? Would we be willing to recruit on a flexible basis? Without top-level consensus on what the objectives are, it will be difficult to persuade anyone else.
Having agreed a set of principles at board level, it’s important to find out the view from the ground. What is the appetite for flexible working among teams, managers, individuals? What are the barriers that different groups anticipate? Leaders need to understand how their principles might be received, and make their implementation a collaborative process, rather than just imposing them company-wide.
If there are negative perceptions about flexible working floating around, ignoring them isn’t the answer; they need to be addressed with actions as well as words. To give just one example, the myth that part-time means less committed can be disproved by giving prominence to part-time role models, or making recruitment opportunities and promotions available on a part-time basis.
Successful flexible working is based on a number of behaviours and skills including:
Leaders need to identify the critical factors within their organisations, and equip their employees to develop them.
Change of this scale can feel daunting for employees, even if they stand to benefit. So, leaders need to make sure that their people understand the principles and their objectives, are clear about the role they will play in embedding them, and know where to go for extra support, or to highlight unforeseen issues. Putting in place a system of feedback and review will help make the process transparent, fair and successful.
While show, don’t tell, might sound like an oversimplification, it is true that one of the best ways to drive a flexible culture is to lead by example. During the first lockdown, leaders shared their personal experiences of juggling home and work, which made their employees feel more comfortable about their own challenges, and the reverse is also true; saying one thing and doing another will make it harder for changes to land. So, for example, if working two or three days a week from home becomes company policy, leaders should do it too.
It’s worth remembering, too, that the implications of getting this right or wrong will resonate outside the organisation. It’s becoming increasingly common, for example, for potential clients to ask for D&I credentials as part of the pitch process (and there are suggestions that it may soon be a factor in boardroom bonuses too). And with flexible working high on employee wish lists, job seekers who are in a position to choose will be asking how flexible potential employers are – and bad news travels fast.
So, if you’re in a leadership role, and this hasn’t yet come onto your agenda, or it’s being treated as just an HR issue, it’s time for a rethink. Either way, if you need help with designing and implementing successful flexible or hybrid working practices, we can help.
Published February 2021
By Emma Stewart, Co-Founder, Timewise
It’s simple maths, really. If you’re an office-based organisation, and the majority of your employees are going to be spending two or three days working remotely, you probably won’t need the same amount of space going forwards as you did before the pandemic.
Certainly, an Institute of Directors survey suggests that this is likely to be the direction of travel, with more than half considering cutting back on their office space as staff move more permanently to new ways of working. However, if leaders are assuming that they’ll just stagger people’s in-office days to reduce their square footage and operational costs, and otherwise carry on as before, that’s a real wasted opportunity.
Instead, companies need to use this shift in working practices to consider three questions. Firstly, what could we gain as an organisation from radically rethinking how we use our office space? Secondly, what would be the right changes to make, for our people and our organisation? And thirdly, how should we approach the process?
At a macro level, there are a number of opportunities created by this shift in workplace use, outside of simple cost savings. One idea that’s being frequently mentioned is to move from one centralised office to more, smaller regional ones; for example, as the CEO of Coinbase puts it, “One floor of office space in 10 cities, rather than 10 floors of office space in one city.”
Decentralising in some way would allow employers to gain access to a wider talent pool, and a greater diversity of background, experience and opinion, than if they remained based in one of the big cities. And it would potentially allow people who can’t afford the high cost of living centrally to have access to more, better jobs.
From a societal perspective, given the concerns about the effect of the pandemic on high street retailers, and fears of ‘ghost towns’ developing, an increase in the number of localised offices or hubs could also help with town centre regeneration. And of course, there are both environmental and individual gains from minimising commuting, from a decrease in pollution to the impact on people’s mental and physical health.
So, what would these new-style offices be for – and what should be done elsewhere? The pandemic has highlighted the suitability of home working for certain tasks; writing a report, finessing a presentation, or tackling a complex spreadsheet can be tricky to complete in a chat-filled open plan office. And some meetings are highly effective by Zoom or Teams; chaired properly, with a carefully curated invite list, they can be more efficient than a face-to-face equivalent.
Equally, there remain some circumstances in which face-to-face is best, with the most obvious being tasks that require creativity and collaboration. However, although these require people to be in the same place, they’re not best suited to a traditional, cubicle-based layout.
So ideally, instead of simply tweaking their existing real estate for their new ways of working, leaders should start with a blank sheet, thinking about what the new office should be for, before creating spaces to match. And that means thinking about job design.
Before getting excited by floor plans and paint colours, leaders need to invest time and thought into how their employees’ roles break down, work out what can and should be done where and when, and then base any new plans on these redesigned specs. That means considering issues relating to both tasks and people, such as:
Our suggestion would be to start by focusing on tasks, and then take people’s needs into account. It’s also important to consider the wider challenges around hybrid working, to ensure that any new model is both fair and inclusive. And as a side note, it’s worth remembering that there are tax implications for hybrid workplaces in certain circumstances.
A number of companies have already spoken openly about their plans to significantly change the purpose of their workplaces. Aviva is planning to close three offices (but not withdraw from any locations, or lose headcount) and “invest in our sites to provide a more vibrant, inspiring and flexible workspace for our people”.
And Vodafone has gone on the record to say that, while they will retain a presence in London, they can also “see the power of a distributed model, with hub offices elsewhere in the country, to help drive diversity and inclusion, reaching out to undiscovered talents nationally.”
They’re right to have got started; well-executed change of this scale won’t evolve or ‘just happen’; it takes time and investment to get right. We can help; if your organisation doesn’t have the right skills and experience in job design, or you’re not sure where to start, do get in touch.
Published April 2021
