LIVE: Part 2: The Working From Home Conundrum with Ray McGrath, Kate Aldridge & Andy Lopata #36

After all, all art is experience. Hello and welcome back to the 8 Club in Banque for part 2 of our lively live studio debate on the contentious issue of working from home. We still have our wonderful panel of Andy Lopata, Kate Aldridge, and Ray McGrath, and this time we also hear a series of probing and pertinent questions from our live audience. If you missed the last episode, fear not. Simply head on over to thecompanydoctor.com to catch catch up and subscribe for notifications of future episodes and how you can get involved with any upcoming live shows. If this hybrid working arrangement was around when you'd been starting out in your professional careers, if it had been something which was encouraged or which was necessary or which employers were offering, is it something that you would have taken advantage of or would you have been in the office every day? Andy, it sounds like you took advantage of it anyway.

I did take advantage of it, but I'm laughing because I hated my first job after university, and I had to commute from Hendon to Croydon, which, if anyone doesn't know, is a hell of a long journey, and you don't want to end up there. So I'm laughing because, oh my God, yes, I would have jumped at it. But that's not necessarily a positive reason why.

Well, as, as, um, Gary mentioned earlier, I started off my career in the travel industry, and One of the reasons I went into the travel industry was because I love being around people, different cultures, and ultimately I wanted any opportunity to travel. And I'd studied languages at university, and I wanted the opportunity to travel, use my languages, get out and about. So I think I was absolutely not the type of person who wanted to be sitting at home on my own, and that's the type of person I am. So I'm really glad it wasn't really even an opportunity because I had an absolute blast in the travel industry.

You're the most sociable industry there is.

Payments is fine now, and I don't mind working from home a bit more.

And Ray, how about you?

I think it depends how far you go back. Um, I left school when I was 16, no qualifications, and ended up in a working environment. I absolutely loved it. I loved watching people. I love listening to them, not just in professional situations but in social situations as well, and thinking, oh, okay, that I quite like the way that— I know it's going to sound crazy, but I quite like the way they accepted that cup of coffee, or they suggested that perhaps we might look at a different document, or I was— and I saw myself an absolute sponge for that. And I think back that there's a fantastic book, Michael Bungay Smith, called Find Your Great Work, and he has this exercise that's called peak moments, which I you know, I talk about a lot. And you, you really should consider those moments in your career that you, you feel just so proud of what you've achieved. And, um, you really do look at yourself in, in the mirror and go, why, that was a really good job, you know. No matter how humble you are, you just, you think, God, that was fantastic. And I'll tell you, none of those are on team calls when I think of my peak moments.

You used to be a rocket scientist, though, didn't you? Something like that.

Yeah, yeah, it was avionics. Avionics. But that is a good point because the people that I was around were particularly impressive and clearly that makes a difference. But I'd have travelled, you know, and I did travel and I'd be happy with that. So yeah, George, that wouldn't— for me, that wouldn't have been a fixture at all. And then as I progressed through my career, it was just that connection with people. And I think if you're a— if you are a learner, and that doesn't mean to say that you're a graduate or you're just out of school or whatever, if you're just a natural learner, yeah, I, I need human beings, I would say.

It's interesting, doesn't it tell us something, the stark contrast between my answer and Kate and Ray's? And it's a lesson going back to your first question you asked me, should a manager force people to come in? Create the environment where they want to come in, create the environment where they have fun, create an environment where they learn, inspire them and they'll want to come in if that's what you want, rather than tell people.

Yeah, it's funny, I worked in the same company as Kate and we used to have like meetings in different countries just because we could, didn't we?

It was just amazing.

We had a meeting in Spain or in Austria.

But it would often be cheaper to do the meeting abroad because you could get a free hotel abroad.

You reminded me, I'd forgotten about it. Okay, we've only got time for one more question, then we're going to go to the audience. So George is looking worried now, but we only got time for one more question. So here's the question to both of you, three of you, sorry, can't count. It's a quickfire answer. We only want 3 points for this question. If you had more notice about the pandemic and had time to plan because you knew it was coming, what work-from-home solution would you design that would be the most effective? Quickfire answer so that we can get the audience on.

I'll go first if you want.

Go for it.

I'd have definitely invested in better Wi-Fi.

What, at home?

Yeah, from day one.

Right, okay.

I left it too long.

You're on dial-up.

Andy? Soundproofing. The kids that play outside my window in the afternoon are just an absolute nightmare. Uh, yes, more soundproofing.

Ray? One of these microphones.

This is an awesome microphone, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. I need to get it.

Brilliant.

Fantastic. What about for— that's about— it's not all about you guys. What about your people? What would you recommend to them? One thing that they could do or help them? In the working from home. Now, if you knew it was coming, you were planning for your teams or your customers, what would you recommend?

Creating something for people who can't work from home. Very quickly on that, a friend of mine came up with a concept, sadly just ahead of the pandemic, ahead of his time, called NearDesk, where you want to work from home but you can't, so you work near home. So they were workspaces, hot desking, serviced offices in areas where you wouldn't nearly often find them, in commuter belt and so forth.

Very good.

This is going to sound really insane, but I would buy everyone an ironing board, um, because I was given this tip a little bit late. But, you know, we all know sitting is the new smoking, and the danger with working from home is you're just— you're not even commuting, you're not walking enough. And someone gave me this top tip that if you have an ironing board, you can adjust it as a standing desk and that's all you need.

It's awesome. I thought you were gonna say ironing gets your mind going or something.

Absolutely not, I'm not a fan of ironing, but it's a fantastic desk, standing desk.

Thank you for that. Ironing boards all around.

Great padlock on the biscuit barrel.

Very good answer. Yeah, very good. Listen guys, thank you so much. Uh, thank you Andy, thank you Kate, thank you Ray. It was great, it was really insightful. We're gonna now go to the audience. We want spicy questions of the audience so we get the most out of them. So who wants to go first? Lorenzo, and then I'll come to you, Matt, after that.

Hi, I'm Lorenzo from GCX and relate to all the topics that we discussed and some of the answers that were shared this evening. So thanks for that, it makes me feel normal. And one of the things that hasn't been discussed that I've uncovered and realized a lot more and more in this hybrid environment is the rules about working from home. Everyone knows what the rules are when you come into the office, But what are the rules when you work from home and how do you implement that without being draconian? And the reason why I'm asking the question is what I'm seeing lots more of, people are performing, they're meeting the metrics, they're hitting project deadlines and they're talented, but they're working the hours that suit them, which means they're not available sometimes during the day when you want them to join a call or you've got 3 other people and you think, oh, let's bring in Bob because he'll have this information. But Bob's childminding or doing something else. So how do you do that without being draconian?

I think it starts with intent, doesn't it? It starts with, as a leader, you declaring your intent with your team, what it is you expect of them. And these, um, I suppose you can call them courageous conversations, or however you want to refer to them, but I think it's about being really clear about perhaps core hours. And actually, it's more than okay if, I don't know, let's say 4 o'clock, there's things that you need to do, perhaps it's associated with children or whatever it happens to be, and you're on a project, and so you know what the deadlines are, and there's an understanding within your team. I think that's, it's okay to have local rules, team-based rules. And in fact, I think, George, you alluded to it, you know, almost team-based understanding.. But it comes from that statement of intent from whoever is leading. And I think it can differ. But what's not acceptable, and I overheard this in a team session that I was coaching with, where there was an arranged offsite day and it was all on a call. They said, okay, so is everybody okay for tomorrow then? We're all geared up for our offsite day tomorrow. And this lady chipped in and says, yeah, I am, but I've got to let the dog out at 3 o'clock. So I'll tell you what the manager did. She did this. That's quite a long time, and it really went in deep. And she just said, you've known about this for a couple of months. And that's all she said. Anybody want to guess what happened the next day?

You sold the dog.

I just want to ask who let the dog out. Yeah, I've never had the chance to do that recording before.

There was always that opportunity. But suffice to say, there was no issue with the dog. The, the person was present. And I don't, I don't know what that says, and I'm not, I'm not trying to say, you know, you shouldn't shame people into responding in this way. We should set standards. And so I, I don't know whether that answers your question, Lorenzo, but there's something I feel very, very passionate about Kate, you're gonna look like you're about to say something.

No, not right. I actually totally agree that I haven't got a huge amount to add to that. I think it's all about good communication within your team. I think leaders should be empowered to figure that piece out with the team. I don't think it should be mandated from the top unless perhaps you're in a shift or customer services type role and you have got to work pretty fixed hours. But a lot of the jobs in our company certainly aren't like that, and I think it's actually a massive opportunity as a leader to accommodate people who need to run out and get the kids or feed the horse before work. Because if they know they've got that flexibility and you are trusting them, they're much more likely to stay loyal.

Good point.

It's like looking after a lady who comes back from maternity leave and giving them flexibility straight away. They are your most loyal, absolutely productive employees.

Thanks for that. Thanks, Lorenzo. Great question.

Matt. Hi, I'm Matt Cruttry. I'm from Positive Momentum. We're here on a day of frighteningly high temperatures. Climate change is with us. Are offices not one of the key contributors? How can we accept building enormous, great monolithic places, dragging people tens if not hundreds of miles into those offices when our planet is burning.

It's not just the offices, Matt, it's the cost of the commuting to the environment as well. So this is one of the, one of the great arguments for, for homeworking or a hybrid solution that we haven't talked about yet this evening. So it's a great point to make. It's something that organizations can factor in as a key reason to go down more of a— and I think let's be honest, in many cases it's going to be more of a hybrid solution than a wholly homeworking solution. But it's one of the, the, the strong cases for it. I also think that where shareholders, pension schemes are looking for more sustainable approaches from organizations, it's going to tick that box as well. So I think there's a strong argument for it. We are still going to build populations are growing, more people are coming into the workplace. We are going to keep building. I've read an article this week about where the US isn't following the rest of the world and build upwards, and they need to start doing it. So I think that, that conversation is going on. But actually, in the little break we just had, the three of us on the panel were talking about the real estate issue, which is one of the big challenges for businesses when it comes to, you know, how much scope you allow people. Because if you give people flexibility and scope with where they work, then they can't predict what's going to happen with real estate, and that may well put a stop to a lot of the building as well.

I, I just add there, because I look after— I'm not quite sure why as a comms person, but I look after the data collection of our carbon footprint. Not me personally, I have someone in my team who does it. And it's really unclear what the actual impact is. It's very easy to say, oh, you know, pulling people in and making them commute and running offices is more damaging to the environment. But what we found at Paysafe, that the two biggest biggest contributors to our carbon footprint are business travel and the office footprint and running the offices. And we are a carbon-neutral company, so we measure our— we collect the data, we measure our footprint, and then we offset it. We buy carbon credits and offset it through offsetting projects. But in fact, the cost to us for carbon offsetting and the data we generate in our footprint was as high if not higher, with hybrid working, because you have the disadvantage of you're, you're tied into offices still because of leases. Admittedly, you can do something about that, but it's not an overnight thing. And what you're required to do to be carbon neutral is offset the working from home costs, because people are still generating heating, air conditioning, they're using electricity for their laptops. And actually, by fragmenting it you're generating a lot of carbon. And if your offices are largely in city centre locations and people getting the trains and they're getting a bit more serious about being more sustainable, it's, it's not as bad necessarily as you might think. Coming in by car is, is by far the worst. So we've actually focused a lot more on massively reducing business travel. We can, we find we can have more of an impact that way.

Interesting.

Ray, any thoughts? Well, yeah, and at the risk of—

Quick ones?

Absolutely no. Lighten up the touchpaper on this one. Oh, good. I'm just always nervous about catastrophic thinking and catastrophic narrative. It just makes me a little bit nervous. So Julie's here today from a fantastic construction company called Carey's, and I'm sure there's a carbon footprint to consider for that organisation. But actually, I'm way more interested in the cost to the environment of creating concrete in the first place, the, the actual creation of the concrete, which completely dwarfs— it overwhelms anything you might see of the, of what goes on in the actual building itself, or the, or the cars that drive there. You know, it's just this, this creation of it. And I also think, just as a quick side I was reading the other day that they found something about keeping energy in sand. Have people seen that? So the storage of literally these vast quantities of sand and it being able to retain its energy, I think for something like 5 years or something crazy. I saw that's really cool. And I'm sorry to— I'm not trying to make some sort of a smart aleck point here, but I wonder whether they they come up with that in an office, that idea, you know, is where they're in a room together and thinking about that. Yeah, it could be. Yeah. So yeah, I've a lot, lots and lots of thoughts on that, but I just, I want to get behind it really rather than thinking about—

Thanks for the question. Thanks for that, guys. Let's move on to the next question so everyone can get a chance.

This is a question for Kate. You said about the 2-2-1 thing not really working. And I just wondered if you had actual data to say whether that actually had a detrimental effect on performance or whether you just felt as a company that that had failed because people weren't doing what you wanted them to do. It's a really good question. When I said it wasn't working, it wasn't a reflection on performance or productivity. I think honestly we haven't seen any dip in productivity at any point. Since the pandemic kicked off to today, it was more our policy of a 2-2-1 approach did just never really took off. No one really— I say no one, there probably are people who did embrace it, but the vast majority didn't. And we've kind of learned it's partly because we didn't manage it properly. We communicated it and then expected it to just work. And Also because of feedback we've had since launching it, even though people said they wanted something like that, when it came to the crunch and they actually had to start coming back into the office 2 days, I think a lot of people found out they had less appetite than they perhaps thought they had to go back into the office. And there was a real reluctance. In some countries like Bulgaria and India where we had offices, people had moved away from the office to save money. They'd maybe gone back to a family home in a village several hours away, and actually it was a very big deal to come back in. So it was much more resistance than we realized. So now we're going to move to a much, much more flexible model and just let managers decide what works best for their team. And if that's fully remote with occasional trips in, that's fine. We also found that some people wanted to come in every day and felt they couldn't, and that's also fine. So we're just, we're modifying our approach from learning that we didn't really implement it very well.

Very good. Thanks, Sarah.

Paul.

Yes, hi guys, Paul Bibby from Smart Tasking. I'm interested to get your thoughts as to what you think the government can do to support organisations who have got this kind of work.

Well, we're looking at lots of new office premises at the moment because not because we're planning to open more, but we're trying to right-size our current footprint. And we are specifically targeting, particularly in the US, where you can get a lot of relief from governments if you pick the right state. We're really factoring that in now, so it can definitely support you in terms of keeping your costs down. That's just one immediate reaction I have.

The first, the government's got to decide what they want.

Want.

So the current government in the UK wants people back in the office, and I think that would be a stance, for the reasons I talked about earlier, supporting satellite businesses, for many governments. So if you're looking for government support to encourage people back in, it's the infrastructure, it's subsidizing, uh, travel, particularly public transport, it's creating the right infrastructure so that people can get in, can park, you know, if you want to encourage travel by car or get trains more easily. If a government, and I can't see this, wanted to encourage home working, then it's broadband. So I think the answer for me is infrastructure either way.

Very good.

Shada.

Hi, I'm Shada from CAWD. I hear some companies are now saying if you work from home, your wages are going to be adjusted or you're going to get paid less, and I see that as a way that they try to push people back into the office. I mean, half of me thinks yes, because they don't have to pay travel, they don't have to pay for lunch, the expensive lunch that they're forced to buy. Your companies that you've been with, have they actually gonna implement this, and what will they see if they do? Because I feel that they're all gonna run back in the office.

We haven't reduced salaries for people who are working from home, but what we have done in certain locations where we've wanted to encourage people to come in for a variety of reasons, we've introduced things like free lunch vouchers and a few more perks. And we're also trying to just put more fun activities on, make, make the workplace a lot more exciting. So where we might be saving money on reducing our office footprint and some of those overheads, I'm very much lobbying to be spending it all back on the employees and making coming into the office a really like cool, fun thing to do. So we're probably spending more rather than reducing salaries.

But it's a good question because I've had a customer that said to me, you know, my— some of their staff don't want to come back in the office because of cost. They've said, well, maybe I can just get someone from another country then.

Correct.

Exactly. Yeah.

If you're an individual contributor and, well, that's fine, you make the choice. It'll be cheaper. Yeah, I'll just go somewhere, I can still secure that talent and I don't have to burden that cost because the fully loaded cost of somebody that comes into the office, like I say, particularly if they are an individual contributor, yeah, it's really significant. But as I say, if it's a team sport that you play, then that's different.

Yeah, I feel as a company you're going to have a lot more choice And people that live in this country could lose out jobs because you could say, well, I don't need someone working, you know, in London. I can go to Germany and he will work for less wage and be as productive. So I'm very with Ray. I think you need to be in the office.

I didn't know whether I was with me either.

Yeah, because You learn a lot from each other.

Oh, I see what you mean, in terms of particularly if you're a learner. I think so, indeed.

Good question. At the back, is that Julie at the back?

Hi, Julie Welch, Carey Group Limited, and the sector is construction. So I'm interested in the panel's views, whether you've seen a conundrum in businesses where there is a large proportion of the workforce that has no choice but to do their job on a frontline. So you might pick in a warehouse, you might lay bricks, you might be on a till in a retailer, but you have to be in. And have you seen an equity situation where all the office workers that work in those head or regional offices of those kinds of organizations develop a bit of a them and us?

Nice question. Thank you, Julie.

I, I haven't seen it personally. I think it's a great question, uh, and it's a very challenging scenario. You, you can play it both ways. And if you are in a, a role where you could work from home and you realize you're being held back from doing so because someone else can't, that can equally create an issue. So I think it's about adult conversation and communication, uh, and, and getting people on the side. And I think, to be honest, people who whose job relies on being there understand that, and you would hope they're not going to hold grudges, but there is that risk. I haven't come across it personally though.

I have direct experience, large-scale business, working with them right now, and I feel like I'm repeating— I'm a bit of a scratched record here— the rules have really helped, like really strict, clear rules for frontline on exactly what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable. And what, again, at first look may seem draconian, is incredibly helpful. Not necessarily the animosity, Julie, between the haves and the have-nots almost. The subtlety that this particular client is working with, and this is just an absolute swarm of bees just ready to come out, is about competence of leaders. Because they're finding the very competent leaders can be really flexible. And even with these really strict rules— and they've got some in the office and some on the front line— they manage it really well. And the leaders themselves don't necessarily have to walk the talk in quite the same way because it's just really effective. But the less strong leaders, of which there plenty. And thank goodness for the role that I do. There's a, you know, there's an epidemic of mediocrity amongst leadership, and that gives you work, keeps us in good holidays, you know. Yeah, they need them in. They need the less strong leaders in the office. And that's— to, to answer your question, it's that that's actually fueling the difficulty and the animosity. Yeah, I'm, I'm watching it play out. As we speak.

Yeah, thanks, yeah. Uh, Glenn, I think we'll take Glenn's question and then one more, and then we'll probably have to close. Go for it, Glenn.

Hi, thanks, Gary. I'm Glenn from Sigfox. I work in the IT sector. I have a funny feeling my question will end up with a similar answer to Ray's, but let's see where we go. So we sell to many, many companies, and I've seen this trend where employees are reluctant to come back into the office, and the employees seem to be driving the discussion. And maybe I'm old-fashioned, or perhaps I'm naive, but I thought it was the employer who pays the salary that really drives the discussion. Is this something you're seeing, and is it right, is it wrong? Have you got a view on it? A question to Kate to start, I guess, and the rest of the panel if they've got a view, please.

It's 100% something we see. And yeah, the balance has definitely shifted. It feels like an employee's world now. I think the challenge we face though is that, well, last year was called the year of the great resignation in the US. The US is a massively important marketplace for us and it has become an employee's market whether we like it or not. Our attrition rates were going up just because people could move around and get higher salaries so easily. So I think it comes back to culture and flexibility that make the company a bit more sticky for employees. So we're kind of a little bit beholden to employees, even if we are paying the salary. But it's definitely something that I think we witness.

Yeah, it's a candidate's market, is what you say.

Yeah.

Any other thoughts?

Yeah, I, I can add the Great Resignation is one thing where it's becoming the candidate's market. The other is generational changes. Uh, so Kate touched on, on earlier that you hadn't seen much difference in terms of generations within the office. The interviews I've conducted on, on the Connected Leadership podcast about generational change indicate specialists in the area are saying that Gen Z particularly millennials to a point as well, have a different attitude to work than baby boomers and Gen X, and they don't want to be told what to do. And we're moving more towards a portfolio career situation. I'm in my early 50s. When I started work in the civil service with that lovely long commute, I shocked people when I resigned because no one at my grade, first rung of management, had ever resigned and left the civil service. And I did that and went traveling to Australia, and people were fainting at the shock of the whole thing. Now that's commonplace. So I think you've got that generational shift as well. And, and you go to the shift in leadership style that I talked about earlier, in that I think that— again, it was a recent podcast that I, I interviewed, that I did— we looked at whether command and control is on the way out. And it is still forcefully there, but it's becoming less relevant and it's becoming less popular. And the approach that you're talking about there is very much command and control. And going back to the, the earlier point, the millennials and Gen Zs don't want to be commanded or controlled, they want to be consulted. And so that, I think, is what you're witnessing.

Good, very good. I've got— we've got time for one more question.

Yeah, Corinna, I work at Salesforce, and my question is Is there a role for businesses to focus more on helping employees identify with them? So the whole identity piece. And I'm coming from it when, when the epidemic happened, or we all identify with, you know, going to work, having our work clothes and having our coffee in the morning. And when all that disappeared, that was a part of our identity that was almost lost. So rather than policing, come back to work now, should businesses not focus more on how can we align or how can we understand what makes employees identify with our business around our values so that we don't have to police, but we are all working towards a common purpose almost, and that policing force is not necessary?

Yeah, I think it's a great question and I think there's two parts to it. One is the tangible identity that you touched on. So when you talked about, you know, the, the clothes that we wear or the office we go to, it's a long time since I worked for a company, but if I drive past one of the offices I worked in, I'm going to feel that connection, for good or bad, to that organization. And obviously if you work from home, you lose that. Maybe to a degree you can replace that with Zoom backgrounds and so forth, which, which companies are doing. So you still have that strong identity when you are present. In, in a public space. But the other part of the question, I think, is, is where the real answer lies, and that's in the culture and it's in the connections. The, the client I was with on Friday have a lunch and learn and get a pizza every Friday lunchtime together, and I think that brings them together and it creates a conversation that's non-transactional and more relaxed. And I think creating— and it goes back almost to the very beginning of the conversation creating that space where employees talk to each other, where leaders and employees talk to each other as peers and not in a hierarchy. That's where you create an identity with an organization. The bricks are more to the uniforms. Yes, there's something there, and there's definitely something in the memory banks, but I think the, the human touch is where you create the real identity. And I guess that comes from working in the office more than working from home.

Ray, your body language saying something different.

Yeah, it feels really idealistic though, doesn't it? Forgive me.

No, you get your own back now, aren't you?

It's just, I suppose I'm really fortunate I get to spend time with senior leadership teams, and I often ask this question: why do you get out of bed in the mornings to do what you do? And, uh, it's pretty remarkable that like the deafening silence that often can follow. And then of course the next question is, so why do you think your people get out of bed and do what they do? What, what motivates them? And eventually we get there, and it is only 3 things. First is the money. Like, see, because you're not paid, you're not going to get out of bed. And the next, the next is, is the, the recognition. It's like you're just being recognized, you're being seen. And I think that's somewhat to your point about identity. Like, I recognize you. And recognition, of course, could be promotion, or you've done a good job, or— but also can be you've done a bad job. And so I have really interesting conversations with leadership teams about consequence— consequence to brilliant performance, consequence to really poor performance. But the third piece, which is the most interesting, is purpose. What affinity do I have? So I'm working with a medical instrumentation business at the moment. They work in cancer in particular. And, uh, it's right there. It's visceral, you know, it's really here in terms of why they get out of bed. They may complain a little bit about their money, their boss may ignore them a little bit, but my goodness me, they believe in what it is that they do. Now they're fortunate because their product or their service allows them to do that. But I've seen that in carpet manufacturers, seen it in people who worked in paper. You know, the list goes on and it comes down to the most senior people in an organisation, the board in particular, having that conversation of why do we get out of bed in the morning? Why do our people get out of bed?

Brilliant. What a great way to finish. So look, we've run out of time. Thank you, audience, so much for your interesting questions and participation. A round of applause for the audience. And a special thank you to our guests today, our panel, Ray. We'd like to thank Kate and we'd like to thank Andy. So thank you so much for sharing with us today and your expertise.

Thanks for listening to our live debate, and thanks again to our panel, our sponsor SmartTasking, our insightful live audience, and our hosts, Ape Club Bank. Whether you're working from home or in the office 5 days a week, We hope you'll join us for our next episode, details of which will be sent when you sign up to our newsletter over at thecompanydoctor.com. Thanks again and see you next time.