Right now, it seems that you only have to mention remote working, and the topic triggers a whole host of feelings.
The trouble is, like a lot of debates these days, the arguments on all sides are often frighteningly devoid of nuance.
The simple truth about remote working is it works great for some people and certain types of work, and less great for other people and tasks.
Even the most ardent return to office (RTO) proponents understand that being in the office isn’t a universally ideal solution.
They might not admit it so directly, but with a little bit of digging, you can find the clues.
For example, as we’ve all learned from Amazon’s CEO recently announcing a shift back to pre-pandemic office policies, this is one of the stricter approaches. The call was for a full five-days a week office working pattern.
The gist of the CEO’s memo was that physical proximity fosters a stronger company culture and enhances collaboration and that face-to-face interactions make it easier for employees to learn from one another, maintain stronger team connections, innovate, and brainstorm.
Setting aside, for a moment, whether that’s true, I want to highlight three sentences from his memo in which he outlines a few common-sense exceptions:
“Before the pandemic, not everybody was in the office five days a week, every week. If you or your child were sick, if you had some sort of house emergency, if you were on the road seeing customers or partners, if you needed a day or two to finish coding in a more isolated environment, people worked remotely. This was understood, and will be moving forward as well.”
Can you guess which part of that quote caught my eye?
It’s the part about “if you needed a day or two to finish coding in a more isolated environment…”
Anyone who’s ever done creative or high-concentration work (thinking, writing, analyzing, etc), knows full well that you can get more work done in one hour somewhere quiet and interruption-free than you can in six hours at the office.
And for leaders, if your goal is getting the best possible work from your team, giving them an ounce of flexibility to figure out the best environment to accomplish their work is in your best interest.
One aspect of a leader’s style is called Directiveness.
Directiveness refers to how much control or authority someone exercises in guiding others.
A person high in directiveness tends to give clear, specific instructions, makes decisions for others, and closely manages how tasks are done.
Someone low in directiveness is more hands-off, allowing employees to make their own decisions and lets people work independently with less oversight or specific guidance.
Now, as you might guess, in the current environment, leaders with lower directiveness tend to be preferred.
In fact, data from the test “What’s Your Leadership Style?” reveals that the most preferred type of leader is an Idealist.
This is someone low in directiveness, who provides a more democratic and open-ended approach to leadership.
Rather than giving detailed instructions or tightly controlling decisions, these types of leaders encourage creativity, personal expression, and learning by doing.
They don’t impose strict processes or structures, but instead foster an environment where everyone has an equal voice and the freedom to explore ideas.
Low directiveness isn’t appropriate in every situation of course.
Sometimes, there needs to be a tightly controlled environment.
However, even Amazon’s CEO hints at the idea that if we want to get great work done, we may have to allow people the freedom to find the best way for themselves.
So before your company follows Amazon’s lead and issues the blanket RTO policy, you may want to think through whether that’s really the best way to get the best work from your folks.
