近期,谷歌(Google)發(fā)布了新版疫后工作政策,要求員工每周至少在辦公室工作三天。這一政策的出臺與許多普通谷歌員工的期望背道而馳。一項覆蓋1000多名谷歌員工的調查顯示,有三分之二的受訪者對“被迫每周在辦公室工作三天”感到不滿,在該公司的內部會議和公開信中,許多員工威脅稱,(與其屈服于該項疫后新政)自己寧愿離職,更有一些員工已經跳槽去了其他工作安排更為靈活的企業(yè)。
然而谷歌的領導層卻不為所動,依然在為這項要求全體員工多半時間在辦公室辦公的政策進行辯護,并聲稱這是為保護公司社交資本(social capital,即員工之間的聯系和信任)的必要之舉。事實上,按照谷歌前人力資源主管拉茲洛·博克的說法,一周三天到辦公室辦公很可能只是一項過渡政策,谷歌領導層的最終目標是在未來幾年內全面恢復辦公室辦公。谷歌前首席執(zhí)行官埃里克·施密特對這一新政表示支持,他說,“我是個傳統(tǒng)主義者,我認為,(要想讓團隊新人從崗位訓練中受益,)到辦公室辦公必不可少?!?/p>
谷歌認為,重返辦公室辦公是保護企業(yè)社交資本的必然舉措,這一立場與蘋果(Apple)不謀而合,后者也提出了每周到崗工作三天的要求,同樣引發(fā)了員工不滿,許多人已經打算在被迫返回辦公室辦公時選擇離職。
相比之下,亞馬遜(Amazon)和推特(Twitter)等許多科技巨頭在工作安排上就靈活得多,為員工提供了諸多遠程辦公的選項。包括全美互惠保險公司(Nationwide)、德勤(Deloitte)和應用材料公司(Applied Materials)在內,許多非技術企業(yè)也采用了此種做法。他們難道是置自己的社交資本于不顧嗎?
顯然不是。這些具有前瞻性的企業(yè)發(fā)現,混合辦公甚至全遠程辦公并不必然導致企業(yè)社交資本的流失。
不過,如果企業(yè)只是試圖將以辦公室為中心的傳統(tǒng)協作方法硬塞進混合辦公和遠程辦公的模式之中,那么社交資本的流失將在所難免。正因如此,相關研究結果特別強調,有些企業(yè)因為在封城期間將疫情前既有的工作安排套入遠程辦公模式而蒙受了社交資本方面的損失。
不過研究表明,通過采用混合辦公和遠程辦公領域的最佳做法,企業(yè)可以提高自身的社交資本。線上協作(virtual coworking)和線上閑談(virtual watercoolers)便是兩個很好的例子。在員工如何才能在混合優(yōu)先工作模式中給出最佳表現方面,我進行了大量研究,并根據研究結果制訂出了這些策略,又先后幫助18家企業(yè)(包括多家財富500強企業(yè))完成了混合優(yōu)先工作模式轉型,因此,我可以自信地說,這些策略都經受了實戰(zhàn)的考驗。相關策略的運作原理如下:
線上協作
借助線上協作,員工可以享受到許多面對面協作所能帶來的社交資本方面的好處,還能免受通勤之苦。在此過程中,小組成員可以一邊開視頻會議,一邊處理各自手頭的任務。
與在辦公室隔間中工作時一樣,員工在享受團隊協作的好處的同時,也可以不受干擾地完成自己的工作。在遇到問題時,團隊成員可以隨時向其他同事進行提問,并快速得到解答。
由于崗位訓練的本質就是前輩為新人解答問題、演示工作方法,所以線上協作可以完美滿足這方面的需求。不過經驗更為豐富的員工同樣可以從中受益,在遇到非本專業(yè)的問題時,他們可能也會需要其他同事幫忙指點迷津。有些時候,有些問題通過短會或者簡短說明可以更快得到解決。經常有員工為了獲得這種協助而專門選擇在協作會上處理那些更為復雜或棘手的任務。
有些時候,團隊成員會單純聊聊自己,說說工作和生活中的事情。這是在辦公室辦公的另一好處,同樣也可以在線上協作中獲得。
線上閑談
另一種非常適合混合辦公或全遠程辦公模式的技術是“線上閑談”,與在休息室或飲水機旁閑談一樣,線上閑談也可以幫助企業(yè)積累社交資本。各團隊都要在自己使用的協作軟件(例如Slack或微軟的Teams)中創(chuàng)建閑談群組,專供團隊成員討論與工作無關的私人話題。每天早上,無論是來辦公室上班還是在家辦公,所有團隊成員都要回答以下問題,并將答案發(fā)送到群組之中:
1)總體感覺如何?
2)除了工作,最近在生活中還遇到了哪些有趣的事情?
3)工作進展如何?哪些工作進展順利?碰到了哪些難題?
4)有什么其他團隊成員對你或這個世界不了解的事情?說出一件
我們鼓勵員工在回答問題時配上照片或視頻,同時還要求他們最少對三位于當天更新信息的同事進行回復。這些問題大多討論的是工作以外的生活,目的是幫助員工增進對彼此的了解。此類互動可以讓員工顯得更有人情味,從“人”的角度增進對彼此的了解,同時幫助企業(yè)積累社交資本。
其中也有一個關于工作的問題(列表中的第三個問題),其著眼點在于幫助團隊成員了解其他人正在忙著哪些工作,進而提升團隊的協作效率。
白天,團隊成員可以在群組中自由發(fā)布各種私人內容,分享自己的生活,也可以對他人發(fā)布的內容進行回復。通過將強制性的晨間簽到與自發(fā)的個人分享進行結合,我們可以在建立聯系與培養(yǎng)信任之間實現良好的平衡,讓不同偏好、不同個性的員工都能樂在其中。
簡而言之,混合辦公模式甚至全遠程辦公模式并不必然意味著社交資本的損失。只有在領導層給自己貼上“傳統(tǒng)主義者”標簽、將頭埋進沙子中拒絕改變圍著辦公室轉的傳統(tǒng)做法時,這種工作安排才會削弱員工之間的聯系。
谷歌、蘋果等傳統(tǒng)主義企業(yè)拒絕采用混合辦公和遠程辦公領域的最佳做法(如線上協作和線上閑談),而后又將社交資本方面的損失歸咎于混合辦公和遠程辦公模式。但也有更具超前思維和進步性的企業(yè)將會利用上述最佳做法不斷積累社交資本、招募杰出員工,那些因工作安排不夠靈活而離開谷歌、蘋果等公司的員工就將投身到這些企業(yè)旗下。此類企業(yè)選擇采用混合優(yōu)先工作模式,而非對過去那種以辦公室為中心的工作模式進行小修小補,如此一來,它們必將在人才競爭中占據優(yōu)勢地位,而那些因循守舊的企業(yè)則將落于下風。(財富中文網)
本文作者格列布?齊普斯基是一名行為科學家,前瞻規(guī)劃咨詢公司Disaster Avoidance Experts的首席執(zhí)行官,也是《領導混合式遠程團隊:借助最佳實踐獲取競爭優(yōu)勢的基準手冊》(Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams: A Manual on Benchmarking to Best Practices for Competitive Advantage)的作者。
譯者:梁宇
審校:夏林
近期,谷歌(Google)發(fā)布了新版疫后工作政策,要求員工每周至少在辦公室工作三天。這一政策的出臺與許多普通谷歌員工的期望背道而馳。一項覆蓋1000多名谷歌員工的調查顯示,有三分之二的受訪者對“被迫每周在辦公室工作三天”感到不滿,在該公司的內部會議和公開信中,許多員工威脅稱,(與其屈服于該項疫后新政)自己寧愿離職,更有一些員工已經跳槽去了其他工作安排更為靈活的企業(yè)。
然而谷歌的領導層卻不為所動,依然在為這項要求全體員工多半時間在辦公室辦公的政策進行辯護,并聲稱這是為保護公司社交資本(social capital,即員工之間的聯系和信任)的必要之舉。事實上,按照谷歌前人力資源主管拉茲洛·博克的說法,一周三天到辦公室辦公很可能只是一項過渡政策,谷歌領導層的最終目標是在未來幾年內全面恢復辦公室辦公。谷歌前首席執(zhí)行官埃里克·施密特對這一新政表示支持,他說,“我是個傳統(tǒng)主義者,我認為,(要想讓團隊新人從崗位訓練中受益,)到辦公室辦公必不可少?!?/p>
谷歌認為,重返辦公室辦公是保護企業(yè)社交資本的必然舉措,這一立場與蘋果(Apple)不謀而合,后者也提出了每周到崗工作三天的要求,同樣引發(fā)了員工不滿,許多人已經打算在被迫返回辦公室辦公時選擇離職。
相比之下,亞馬遜(Amazon)和推特(Twitter)等許多科技巨頭在工作安排上就靈活得多,為員工提供了諸多遠程辦公的選項。包括全美互惠保險公司(Nationwide)、德勤(Deloitte)和應用材料公司(Applied Materials)在內,許多非技術企業(yè)也采用了此種做法。他們難道是置自己的社交資本于不顧嗎?
顯然不是。這些具有前瞻性的企業(yè)發(fā)現,混合辦公甚至全遠程辦公并不必然導致企業(yè)社交資本的流失。
不過,如果企業(yè)只是試圖將以辦公室為中心的傳統(tǒng)協作方法硬塞進混合辦公和遠程辦公的模式之中,那么社交資本的流失將在所難免。正因如此,相關研究結果特別強調,有些企業(yè)因為在封城期間將疫情前既有的工作安排套入遠程辦公模式而蒙受了社交資本方面的損失。
不過研究表明,通過采用混合辦公和遠程辦公領域的最佳做法,企業(yè)可以提高自身的社交資本。線上協作(virtual coworking)和線上閑談(virtual watercoolers)便是兩個很好的例子。在員工如何才能在混合優(yōu)先工作模式中給出最佳表現方面,我進行了大量研究,并根據研究結果制訂出了這些策略,又先后幫助18家企業(yè)(包括多家財富500強企業(yè))完成了混合優(yōu)先工作模式轉型,因此,我可以自信地說,這些策略都經受了實戰(zhàn)的考驗。相關策略的運作原理如下:
線上協作
借助線上協作,員工可以享受到許多面對面協作所能帶來的社交資本方面的好處,還能免受通勤之苦。在此過程中,小組成員可以一邊開視頻會議,一邊處理各自手頭的任務。
與在辦公室隔間中工作時一樣,員工在享受團隊協作的好處的同時,也可以不受干擾地完成自己的工作。在遇到問題時,團隊成員可以隨時向其他同事進行提問,并快速得到解答。
由于崗位訓練的本質就是前輩為新人解答問題、演示工作方法,所以線上協作可以完美滿足這方面的需求。不過經驗更為豐富的員工同樣可以從中受益,在遇到非本專業(yè)的問題時,他們可能也會需要其他同事幫忙指點迷津。有些時候,有些問題通過短會或者簡短說明可以更快得到解決。經常有員工為了獲得這種協助而專門選擇在協作會上處理那些更為復雜或棘手的任務。
有些時候,團隊成員會單純聊聊自己,說說工作和生活中的事情。這是在辦公室辦公的另一好處,同樣也可以在線上協作中獲得。
線上閑談
另一種非常適合混合辦公或全遠程辦公模式的技術是“線上閑談”,與在休息室或飲水機旁閑談一樣,線上閑談也可以幫助企業(yè)積累社交資本。各團隊都要在自己使用的協作軟件(例如Slack或微軟的Teams)中創(chuàng)建閑談群組,專供團隊成員討論與工作無關的私人話題。每天早上,無論是來辦公室上班還是在家辦公,所有團隊成員都要回答以下問題,并將答案發(fā)送到群組之中:
1)總體感覺如何?
2)除了工作,最近在生活中還遇到了哪些有趣的事情?
3)工作進展如何?哪些工作進展順利?碰到了哪些難題?
4)有什么其他團隊成員對你或這個世界不了解的事情?說出一件
我們鼓勵員工在回答問題時配上照片或視頻,同時還要求他們最少對三位于當天更新信息的同事進行回復。這些問題大多討論的是工作以外的生活,目的是幫助員工增進對彼此的了解。此類互動可以讓員工顯得更有人情味,從“人”的角度增進對彼此的了解,同時幫助企業(yè)積累社交資本。
其中也有一個關于工作的問題(列表中的第三個問題),其著眼點在于幫助團隊成員了解其他人正在忙著哪些工作,進而提升團隊的協作效率。
白天,團隊成員可以在群組中自由發(fā)布各種私人內容,分享自己的生活,也可以對他人發(fā)布的內容進行回復。通過將強制性的晨間簽到與自發(fā)的個人分享進行結合,我們可以在建立聯系與培養(yǎng)信任之間實現良好的平衡,讓不同偏好、不同個性的員工都能樂在其中。
簡而言之,混合辦公模式甚至全遠程辦公模式并不必然意味著社交資本的損失。只有在領導層給自己貼上“傳統(tǒng)主義者”標簽、將頭埋進沙子中拒絕改變圍著辦公室轉的傳統(tǒng)做法時,這種工作安排才會削弱員工之間的聯系。
谷歌、蘋果等傳統(tǒng)主義企業(yè)拒絕采用混合辦公和遠程辦公領域的最佳做法(如線上協作和線上閑談),而后又將社交資本方面的損失歸咎于混合辦公和遠程辦公模式。但也有更具超前思維和進步性的企業(yè)將會利用上述最佳做法不斷積累社交資本、招募杰出員工,那些因工作安排不夠靈活而離開谷歌、蘋果等公司的員工就將投身到這些企業(yè)旗下。此類企業(yè)選擇采用混合優(yōu)先工作模式,而非對過去那種以辦公室為中心的工作模式進行小修小補,如此一來,它們必將在人才競爭中占據優(yōu)勢地位,而那些因循守舊的企業(yè)則將落于下風。(財富中文網)
本文作者格列布?齊普斯基是一名行為科學家,前瞻規(guī)劃咨詢公司Disaster Avoidance Experts的首席執(zhí)行官,也是《領導混合式遠程團隊:借助最佳實踐獲取競爭優(yōu)勢的基準手冊》(Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams: A Manual on Benchmarking to Best Practices for Competitive Advantage)的作者。
譯者:梁宇
審校:夏林
Google recently announced its new post-pandemic work policy, requiring employees work in the office for at least three days a week. That policy goes against the desires of many rank-and-file Google employees. A survey of over 1,000 Google employees showed that two-thirds feel unhappy about being forced to work in the office three days a week; in internal meetings and public letters, many have threatened to leave, and some are already quitting to go to other companies with more flexible options.
Yet Google’s leadership is defending its requirement of mostly in-office work for all staff as necessary to protect the company’s social capital, meaning people’s connections to and trust in one another. In fact, according to the former head of HR at Google, Laszlo Bock, three days a week is likely to be just a transition period. Google’s leadership intends to require full-time in-office work in the next couple of years. Ex–Google CEO Eric Schmidt supports this notion, saying, “I’m a traditionalist” and it’s “important that these people be at the office” to get the benefit of on-the-job training for junior team members.
Google’s position on returning to the office for the sake of protecting social capital echoes that of Apple, which is requiring a three-days-in-office workweek. That company is similarly meeting with employee discontent, with many intending to leave if forced to return.
By contrast, plenty of other large tech companies, such as Amazon and Twitter, are offering employees much more flexibility with extensive remote work options. The same applies to many non-tech companies, such as Nationwide, Deloitte, and Applied Materials. Are they giving up on social capital?
Not at all. What forward-looking companies are discovering is that hybrid and even fully remote work arrangements don’t automatically lead to losing social capital.
However, you do lose social capital if you try to shoehorn traditional, office-centric methods of collaboration into hybrid and remote work. That’s why research findings highlight how companies that transposed their existing pre-pandemic work arrangements onto remote work during lockdowns lost social capital.
Yet studies show that by adopting best practices for hybrid and remote work, organizations can boost their social capital. Two examples of such practices are virtual coworking and virtual watercoolers. I developed these strategies based on extensive research on how people function best in a hybrid-first model. Having applied them in helping 18 organizations transition to a hybrid-first model, including several Fortune 500 companies, I am confident they are battle-tested. Here’s how they work:
Virtual coworking
Virtual coworking offers many of the social capital benefits of in-person coworking without the stress of the commute. The process involves members of small teams working on their own individual tasks while on a videoconference call together.
This experience replicates the benefit of a shared cubicle space, where you work alongside your team members, but on your own work. As team members have questions, they can ask them and get them quickly answered.
This technique offers a wonderful opportunity for on-the-job training: The essence of such training comes from coworkers answering questions and showing junior staff what to do. But it also benefits more experienced team members, who might need an answer to a question from another team member’s area of expertise. Occasionally, issues might come up that would benefit from a brief discussion and clarification. Often, team members save their more complex or confusing tasks to do during a coworking session, for just such assistance.
Sometimes team members will just share about themselves and chat about how things are going in work and life. That’s another benefit of a shared cubicle space, and virtual coworking replicates that experience.
The virtual watercooler
Another excellent technique for a hybrid or fully remote format is the virtual watercooler, to replace the social capital built by team members chatting in the break room or around the watercooler. Each team establishes a channel in their collaboration software—such as Slack or Microsoft Teams—dedicated to personal, nonwork discussions among team members. Every morning, whether they come to the office or work at home, all team members send a message answering the following questions:
1) How are you doing overall?
2) What’s been interesting in your life recently outside of work?
3) What’s going on in your work: What’s going well, and what are some challenges?
4) What is one thing about you or the world that most other team members do not know about?
Employees are encouraged to post photos or videos as part of their answers. They are also asked to respond to at least three other employees who made an update that day. Most of these questions are about life outside work, and they aim to help people get to know each other. They humanize team members, helping them get to know one another as human beings, while building up social capital.
There is also one work question (No. 3 on the list), focusing on helping team members learn what others are working on right now. That question helps them collaborate more effectively.
Then, during the day, team members use that same channel for personal sharing. Anyone who feels inspired can share about what’s going on in their life and respond to others who do so. The combination of mandated morning updates with the autonomy of personal sharing provides a good balance for building relationships and cultivating trust. It fits the different preferences and personalities of the company’s employees.
* * *
So no, hybrid and even fully remote work don’t have to mean the loss of social capital. These work arrangements only lead to weakened connections when leaders who self-identify as “traditionalists” stick their heads in the sand and refuse to budge from their office-centric traditions.
Google, Apple, and similar traditionalist companies are refusing to adopt best practices for hybrid and remote work such as virtual coworking and virtual watercoolers, and then blaming hybrid and remote work arrangements for the loss of social capital. The people leaving Google and Apple due to their inflexible work arrangements are going to more forward-thinking, progressive companies that use best practices to build social capital and recruit excellent staff. These companies are adopting a hybrid-first model, instead of trying to incrementally improve on the office-centric model. Such companies will seize competitive advantage, and old-school companies will be left in the dust in the war for talent.
Gleb Tsipursky is a behavioral scientist, CEO of future-proofing consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts, and author of Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams: A Manual on Benchmarking to Best Practices for Competitive Advantage.