The Jolly Contrarian

The future of office work: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

The future of office work (view source)

Revision as of 10:21, 12 October 2023

488 bytes added ,  12 October 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
And we learned some new things: working from home is pretty cool! Pyjamas! Zoom! Kids rushing in at embarrassing moments!  
And we learned some new things: working from home is pretty cool! Pyjamas! Zoom! Kids rushing in at embarrassing moments!  


As the COVID tide receded, thought leaders in the marketplace of ideas took to [[LinkedIn]] and [[Twitter]] to grapple publicly with what it all meant for the future of work. They fell broadly into two camps.
As the COVID tide receded, thought leaders in the marketplace of ideas took to [[LinkedIn]] and [[Twitter]] to grapple with what it all meant for the future of work. They fell broadly into two camps: ''everything'' and ''nothing'' 


The first was basically to say, “[[This time it’s different|this time is different]]”: the scales have fallen from our eyes, we are no longer in the 1960s and even though we can leave our homes without being arrested, a diverse and dynamic economy of gig-working, side-hustling cosmopolitan youngsters will ''require'' flexibility so, since we now know the business ''can'' manage it — right? — there is no reason flexible working should not become a fact of commercial life. This view was, and is, broadly held by the [[executive coach]]es, [[digital prophet]]s, [[legal practice disruptors]], techno-futurists and lifestyle consultants of the world.
The first — advanced by the [[Thought leader|thought-leaderati]] and legal disruptor crowd — was to say, “[[This time it’s different|this time is different]]”: the scales have fallen, we are no longer in the ’60s and even though we can leave our homes without being arrested, we shouldn’t ''have'' to, and a diverse and dynamic economy of gig-working, side-hustling cosmopolitan youngsters now ''requires'' flexibility so, since we now know the business ''can'' manage it — right? — there is no reason it ''shouldn’t''.  You can’t unsee it: flexible working is now a fact of commercial life.  


The other view was [[The Man]]’s, and it was, “get back into the the office, you punks”.  
The second — [[The Man]]’s — was, “get back into the the office, you punks”. With a twist: [[The Man]] teetered for a while between “I’m not having these good-for-naught [[Meatware|meatsack]]s in their goddamn pyjamas on ''my'' dime”, and the more squirrelly “hold on: if these clowns work at home on their own PCs we can nix half the downtown footprint and slash our [[IT]] bill so let’s not rush this”.  The two impulses then merged and The Man compromised by ditching half the office space ''and'' making everyone go back to work.  


With a twist: [[The Man]]’s view teetered for a while between “these good-for-naught [[Meatware|meatsack]]s are in their goddamn ''pajamas'' and I’m not having ''that'' on my dime”, and the [[COO]]’s more squirrelly “hold on, Clive, if these clowns work remotely on their own PCs we can sublet half the office footprint and slash our [[IT]] bill so let’s not rush this” — but the two eventually compromised by cutting office space ''and'' making everyone come back to work.
Who is right? Well, for the reasons stated, neither, but the JC reluctantly senses [[The Man]] is on the right side of history, but not for the reasons [[The Man]] ''thinks'' are the right ones.  
 
Which view is right? Well, neither, naturally, for the reasons stated, but the JC reluctantly senses [[The Man]] is on the right side of history, for a few reasons (none being the ones [[The Man]] ''thinks'' are the right reasons) but mainly because, as ever, [[This time it’s different|this time ''isn’t'' different]].
 
The JC sides with the evil empire in few cases — except where it disagrees with [[libtards]]. [[South Park Republican]]ism refers.
 
As to why, we offer the following.


===It isn’t COVID any more===
===It isn’t COVID any more===
Working from home during COVID was, for white collar types over a certain age, a revelation. Generally, it was an overwhelming, unexpected, success: by some measures, productivity ''rose'' during lockdown, at least in the early phases, but we should not close the case on this account. COVID was a weird, ''[[sui generis]]'' time. For many reasons.
Working from home during COVID was, for white-collar types of a certain age — older ones — a revelation. By some measures, productivity ''rose'' during lockdown, at least at first, but we should not close the book just yet. COVID was a weird, ''[[sui generis]]'' time, and it lent itself to ephemeral productivity boost.


Firstly, away from work, there was ''nothing else to do'', bar listening to podcasts whilst pacing the perimeter at a safe distance from relatives and other humans. No wonder people threw themselves into work.   
First, there was ''nothing else to do'', bar pacing the perimeter at a safe distance from other humans and listening to podcasts. No wonder we threw ourselves into work.   


Secondly, all those casual workplace interactions & interludes of unofficial humanity — you know, ''distractions'' — that are an inevitable but yet regretted [[externality]] of sequestering humans in glorified air-conditioned battery farms were ''abruptly cut off''.  
Second, all those in-office distractions — the casual interactions & unsanctioned interludes of humanity that are the inevitable [[externality]] of penning humans up in air-conditioned battery farms — were ''abruptly cut off''. Since each person was isolated in her own private hell<ref>Or heaven, as the case may be.</ref> of solitary confinement, there were no “watercooler moments”, no ''sotto voce'' carping about the boss, no frank exchanges of view about last night’s ''Celebrity Love Island'' — we just got on with what we were meant to be doing.  


Since each person was isolated into her own private hell<ref>Or heaven, as the case may be.</ref> of solitary confinement, there were no “watercooler moments”, no ''sotto voce'' carping about the boss, no frank exchanges of view about last night’s ''Celebrity Love Island'' — so people, undistracted, just got on with it.  
Third, when we ''did'' that, we found to our delight that it wasn’t just ''us'' who was disoriented. Middle management was too. All the busy-bodies and bureaucrats struggled to glom on to people whose time they could waste: out of sight, out of mind. The calendar was blissfully bereft of [[opco]]<nowiki/>s, [[Steering committee|steerco]]<nowiki/>s, [[stakeholder]] check-ins, [[Management information and statistics|MIS]] dashboards and [[Line manager|line manager one-to-ones]]. Even meetings that ''could'' have gone ahead online vanished from the calendar. Suddenly we had the time, space and lack of distraction to get on with things. The bureaucratic military industrial complex got its act together soon enough, and the work-creation schemes returned, but things took a while to get back to how they once were. Something about physical separation makes pencil-pushers easier to avoid, and even when the weekly operational robustness legal and compliance workstream catchup goes online ''it is a lot easier to multi-task on Zoom''.


Thirdly, when they ''did'' go to get on with it, to their delight they found it was not just ''they'' who were  discombobulated. Middle management was, too. The bureaucrats struggled to adapt. They scrambled to find people’s time to waste.
Lastly, ''there was no competitive advantage to lockdown''. Every firm was in the same boat. We don’t know how it would have played out, relatively, had [[Goldman]] been allowed back to the office, but Morgan Stanley forced to stay remote. Who would have done better? Maybe being in the office in a time of cholera would have been even ''more'' productive. During COVID, we had no way of knowing. Now, post-COVID, since firms can organise their own approaches to hybrid and remote, we ''do''. We will see.
Suddenly, the calendar was bereft of all those opcos, steercos, stakeholder check-ins, line manager one-to-ones. Weirdly, even [[All-hands conference call|online meetings]] that could have gone ahead got cancelled.  So the meatware had the time, space and lack of distraction to get on with things. As lockdown continued the  middle management military industrial complex got its act together and the bureaucracy levels returned, but never quite got back to once they were. something about physical separation makes them harder to avoid, and even if the weekly operational robustness legal and compliance workstream catchup goes online ''it is a lot easier to multi-task on Zoom''.


Lastly, every firm was in the same boat. ''There was no competitive advantage to lockdown''. We don’t know how it would have played out had Goldman been allowed back to the office, but Morgan Stanley forced to stay remote. Who would have done better? Maybe being in the office would have been even ''more'' productive. During COVID, we had no way of knowing. Now, post-COVID, since firms can organise their own approaches to hybrid and remote, we ''do''. We will see.
Just because things worked well during lockdown, doesn’t mean they worked best that way, or that the change is permanent.


===Pace layers: things revert to how they were.===
===Deep cultural layers don’t change overnight.===
Recalling [[Stewart Brand]]’s idea of [[pace layering]]: working together physically, in communal office, does not, we think, subsist in the “fashion” layer, nor commerce, infrastructure, or governance: rather, it is deeply embedded in the “culture” layer — possibly even at the top end of “biology”. For the changes wrought by the pandemic to become permanent, now the infrastructural and governance requirement for staying away from the office have gone, they must be matters  not just of personal preference, or fashion, but they must also continue to optimise the “problems” of each successive layer. It might do, even if it is no longer solving not problems presented by a pandemic, if it solves ''other'' problems we didn’t know we had until the revelation of working from home illustrated them, and proved itself a better way of handling them. For that, snap judgments, motivated by the personal preferences of employees (look: who wouldn’t prefer to work in their pyjamas at the kitchen table, all else being equal?) won’t be the end of the matter. The suit and tie has still hung on, despite a twenty-year onslaught: there is a lot less common sense propelling that.   
{{Quote|Fast learns, slow remembers. Fast proposes, slow disposes. Fast is discontinuous, slow is continuous. Fast and small instructs slow and big by accrued innovation and by occasional revolution. Slow and big controls small and fast by constraint and constancy. ''Fast gets all our attention, slow has all the power''.
:— {{author|Stewart Brand}}, ''[https://jods.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/issue3-brand/release/2 Pace Layering: How Complex Systems Learn and Keep Learning]''}}
Humans have worked together in communal offices since at least the industrial revolution. We’ve had the means to work remotely for a couple of decades. That we still congregate is no matter of “fashion”, nor commerce, infrastructure, or governance, and it is not simply because until now we haven’t had the choice. There are material benefits to being together. Our need for interpersonal communication is embedded in the “culture” layer — possibly even at the top end of “biology”. For the changes wrought by the pandemic to become permanent, now the infrastructural and governance requirement for staying away from the office have gone, they must be matters  not just of personal preference, or fashion, but they must also continue to optimise the “problems” of each successive layer. It might do, even if it is no longer solving not problems presented by a pandemic, if it solves ''other'' problems we didn’t know we had until the revelation of working from home illustrated them, and proved itself a better way of handling them. For that, snap judgments, motivated by the personal preferences of employees (look: who wouldn’t prefer to work in their pyjamas at the kitchen table, all else being equal?) won’t be the end of the matter. The suit and tie has still hung on, despite a twenty-year onslaught: there is a lot less common sense propelling that.   


Only time will tell, as a generation steps through the working life cycle — but we can only judge that over forty years: not ''four''.  
Only time will tell, as a generation steps through the working life cycle — but we can only judge that over forty years: not ''four''.  


We fifty-somethings, having by now acquired reasonable wealth and exhausted most of our practical avenues for career development or life change, are hardly the ones to judge. We are happy enough to swim lengths, clicking in and out remotely and connecting the paycheque as long as someone else is gormless enough to pay it to us. The merits of working downtown against the den in the attic. New entrants who are still hungry to learn, progress, take responsibility and relieve bored fifty-somethings of their executive responsibilities will shape culture over the next twenty years. We will be long gone.
We fifty-somethings, having by now acquired reasonable wealth and exhausted most of our practical avenues for career development or life change, are not the ones to judge. We are happy enough to swim lengths, clicking in and out remotely and connecting the paycheque as long as someone else is gormless enough to pay it to us. The merits of working downtown against the den in the attic. New entrants who are still hungry to learn, progress, take responsibility and relieve bored fifty-somethings of their executive responsibilities will shape culture over the next twenty years. We will be long gone.


===Being shocked into looking round corners===
===Being shocked into looking round corners===
On the other hand there is attention between our societal drift back to what we are used to, and the opportunities presented by being forced to look sideways and examine the contents of doors in the adjacent possible. Now we know that businesses can operate remotely for extended periods, there is no sense trying to pretend otherwise. Likewise, and entire aging generation of technophobes were forced to go online. This may mean that the usual impassioned please about post offices and Bank branches needing to remain open because elderly people don't understand the internet will die more quickly than they might otherwise have done.
On the other hand there is attention between our societal drift back to what we are used to, and the opportunities presented by being forced to look sideways and examine the contents of doors in the adjacent possible. Now we know that businesses can operate remotely for extended periods, there is no sense trying to pretend otherwise. Likewise, and entire aging generation of technophobes were forced to go online. This may mean that the usual impassioned please about post offices and Bank branches needing to remain open because elderly people don’t understand the internet will die more quickly than they might otherwise have done.
===Bullshit jobs===
===Bullshit jobs===
Counterpointing this is the implicit fact that most businesses suspect that much of what their employees do from day to day is essentially meaningless. This is a buried, subconscious instinct — no one (other than the late [[David Graeber]]) says it out loud or even thinks it (it carries the  recursive risk that it may be true of one’s own job, so is best left unsaid and, ideally, unthought) — but it propels much of the modernist dogma of contemporary management: offshore in comma outsourcing, downskilling all must be predicated on the theory that what employees do isn't quite as hard as they like to make it out to be).
Counterpointing this is the implicit fact that most businesses suspect that much of what their employees do from day to day is essentially meaningless. This is a buried, subconscious instinct — no one (other than the late [[David Graeber]]) says it out loud or even thinks it (it carries the  recursive risk that it may be true of one’s own job, so is best left unsaid and, ideally, unthought) — but it propels much of the modernist dogma of contemporary management: offshore in comma outsourcing, downskilling all must be predicated on the theory that what employees do isn't quite as hard as they like to make it out to be).
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/78914"