Fewer bums on seats at the office equals a happier, productive workforce. That’s the outcome of two diverse global studies which found that employees who spent less time at work, ended up with better mental health and higher productivity levels.
FEWER bums on seats at the office equals a happier, productive workforce.
That’s the outcome of two diverse global studies which found that employees who spent less time at work, ended up with better mental health and higher productivity levels.
While the studies looked at work from different perspectives; one the hybrid working model and the other, a four day work week, the results showed that post Covid-19 workers were no longer happy to return to the old way of doing things, like pitching up at the office every day and slogging away for hours.
What’s more, the evidence shows that companies which offered fewer working hours and the chance of working off-site were more likely to retain and attract the best staff.
However, despite warning them of the disadvantages, a number of large South African corporates have mandated that their teams return to the office for at least two days per week, sometimes up to four, with little of the flexibility we saw at the height of the pandemic, said leadership expert Advaita Naidoo, Africa MD at Jack Hammer Global.
She said that employers who continued to push for people to return to the office should reconsider this as those leaders and organisations who embraced hybrid work solutions enjoyed a huge competitive advantage and would continue to lead the race for top talent.
“What’s evident is that old habits die hard, and many managers would prefer that all staff are at the office.”
Naidoo said while the logistics varied by company, the hybrid model combined remote and on-site work, with some insisting that staff be in the office on specific days and others leaving the decision up to their teams.
“The main benefit for employees is better work-life balance, achieved by reducing the amount of time and stress that comes with commuting and the flexibility to work in a location and during times that suit them. This in turn leads to increased productivity, job satisfaction and retention.”
She said after a year of global surveys and substantial research, there was enough evidence for employers to make an informed call, as the data unequivocally proved that hybrid workplace solutions worked.
“Over the past year, there has been a lot of experimenting and not a little arm-wrestling between management and employees about what constitutes a fair return-to-office policy,” said Naidoo.
“In April last year, we warned companies against unilaterally demanding a return to work of all employees, who were often given very little time to make the transition. Now, evidence – quantitatively, qualitatively, locally and globally – overwhelmingly shows that was the right call at the time.”
Despite this, companies continued to strong-arm workers into returning to the office, and given the harsh economic landscape and threats of continued job cuts, companies might erroneously feel that employees (knowledge workforce, not front-line) have little choice should management call for a return of all bums on seats once more, Naidoo added.
She warned that there was a “distinct move away” from the connection and support established during the lockdown, but this wasn’t a sign that they supported decisions made without their buy-in.
But how does the hybrid working model compare to the four-day work week?
According to Naido: “The similarities are that they both offer employees flexibility and the ability to achieve greater work life balance.
“The danger with the hybrid model is that workplace burnout can creep in if remote teams work longer hours and take fewer breaks and the four-day week is designed to create extra personal time for an employee. However, a shorter week could also be more intense and stressful, so companies need to find the solution most suited to their environment.”
However, she says that results vary, but they had rough polling data that showed that South Africans prefer the hybrid model to the four-day work week.
In March South Africa became part of a global work experiment to determine whether a four -day work week was possible to give employees a better work/life balance.
Ten weeks into the programme and the head of the South African leg, Karen Lowe, said the interest was growing and while they would publish extensive results later this year, it took about eight to 10 weeks before companies started to settle into their new way of doing things which was right about now.
“It’s not all a bed of roses; it takes a lot of open-mindedness and adaptive thinking,” said Lowe.
Several organisations enrolled for the first pilot phase which would last six months and they were already recruiting companies for a second pilot. Botswana and Namibia will possibly be joining as part of the South African experiment as well.
Lowe said the four-day work week could easily be adopted to any work format, be it hybrid, remote or on-site.
It was not about cramming more work into less time; it was about giving workers time off to have a better work/life balance, she said.
Lowe said outcomes from the four-day work week experiments in countries around the world, including Ireland, Canada and the UK, showed that 92% of participating companies continued with the new work plan even once the study was over.
The four-day work week is based on the concept whereby employees are paid 100% of their pay for 80% of the time while delivering 100% of the work.
Globally, 91 countries and over 3 300 employees have already participated in the campaign.
“Twenty percent of participants said that no amount of money would make them go back to a five-day work week,” said Lowe.
Labour law specialist Saber Ahmed Jazbhay said while he was in favour of flexible working conditions, these were not suited to all industries in South Africa. He said in addition, workers who were paid per hour could be disadvantaged if their time at work was reduced but they were only paid for the hours spent on the job.
