立即打开
大胆设想:不要办公室,全面远程办公可行吗?

大胆设想:不要办公室,全面远程办公可行吗?

Brian Kardon 2020-07-08
由于远程办公有许多优势,因此诸多商业领袖对这种优势已有深刻认识。

过去数周,许多知名企业,包括推特、Facebook和Nationwide在内,都因为颁布新政、允许员工在家办公而登上了新闻头条。但显然,有关讨论中并未提及部分远程办公和全面远程办公的重要区别。

各家企业都在公告中表示,办公室并不会完全消失,企业只是对其优先级进行了重新排序。虽然大胆转向远程工作的举措备受欢迎,但截至目前,尚未有一家知名企业宣布自己将会完全抛弃办公室,各方更多地是在缩小办公室规模,或者增加远程办公的比重。这些企业既没有选择完全远程办公,也没有选择完全在办公室办公,只是试图在两者之间谋求一种新的平衡。

鉴于新冠疫情,公司应该检视远程办公政策,并考虑是否需要办公室。图片来源:Willie B. Thomas—Getty Images

而我想提出的则是一个完全不同的选项,也是一个迄今为止乏人关注的选项:全面远程办公。

在我担任首席市场官的InVision,我们自2011年创办以来就一直在远程办公,我们将这种工作方式称为“完全分布式”的办公方式。InVision共有约700名员工,遍布在从西雅图到新加坡的全球各地,但无论是在哪里,大家全都没有自己的办公室,只有为数不多的几处共享办公空间,如同在家庭办公室的海洋中徜徉的几叶扁舟。没有中心化办公室、员工分布式办公正是数字化产品设计与开发软件企业InVision的典型特征。

部分远程办公与全面远程办公之间存在着巨大差异,这是因为两者会带来截然不同的体验。

就像许多人在新冠疫情期间经历过的那样,如果大家都在远程办公,那么同事之间会产生一种同志之情,也更容易产生同理心,进而增进彼此之间的情谊。如此一来,全体员工都能体验到远程办公带来的优势及其存在的挑战。大家使用的工具别无二致,遵从的流程也并无不同,这样就可以为所有员工打造一个公平的竞争环境,让大家不受距离影响,都能成为企业文化不可或缺的一份子,并因此而齐心协力工作。

如果有部分员工在办公室工作,另一部分员工却在远程工作,就会造成两种不同的工作体验。

有些会议在办公室开,有些则在线上举行。有些员工能拿到各种津贴和福利,其它员工则没有。流程本应人人遵守,但执行力度却因人而异。同事之间的关系也因为是否在办公室上班而划出了界限。随着时间的推移,这些差异将会被日益放大,并因此凸显出部分远程办公的最大风险:让一家企业分化成为两个不同的组织。

今年早些时候,我们出版了一本有关远程办公的专著。在书籍撰写期间,有一位InVision的员工在接受采访时表示,自己曾经服务于一家部分远程办公的企业,当时的经历让她感觉非常糟糕,以至于对远程办公产生了抗拒心理。“虽然那家企业也很体贴周到,想让远程办公的员工感觉自己也是企业的一份子,但不公平的现象依然存在。”

当然,完全远程办公的组织也会面临自己的挑战。InVision之所以在一些不同城市还留有共享办公空间,部分原因是有些员工无法或不想在家工作。随着InVision规模的不断扩大,有些员工也开始觉得企业缺少凝聚力,这也促使我们在2017年开始举行年度团建活动。自此以后,这种活动就成了我们企业的一种重要文化活动。在我们看来,投入大量时间和资金开展这种活动对员工非常有意义。我们也发现,举办小型团建活动有利于团结员工、建立信任。

相较于全面远程办公的企业,部分远程办公的企业同样面临着激励员工、保持员工参与度、协调员工关系等问题,由于同时存在办公室和居家办公两种形式,势必会导致某种不确定性和混乱,进而产生一些新问题,而这些问题同样需要部分远程办公的企业想办法解决。

那么为什么要全面推进远程办公,而不是干脆放弃远程办公,全都回办公室工作呢?这是因为远程办公有许多优势,诸多商业领袖对这种优势已有深刻认识。远程办公的员工满足感更高、工作倦怠感更低、工作生活平衡也更好。我们知道远程办公可以将员工的生产力提高50%,还能节省一笔办公空间维护费用。企业可以免受空间限制,雇佣全球各地的员工,这也是解决日益严重的“人才紧缺”问题的关键所在。Gartner在2019年对企业高管进行的一项调查显示,“人才紧缺”是各种组织当前面临的最大风险。

而公共卫生事件又给我们向远程办公转型提供了更多理由。

虽然越来越多的企业开始返岗办公,但未来情况会如何发展仍然不明朗。需要错峰排班吗?要不要扩大办公空间,让员工保持更多距离?要不要对进入大楼的人进行检测,看他们是否有流行病相关症状?要不要给那些愿意返岗办公的员工提供额外激励或更高薪水?如果你是某个企业公共卫生事件应对小组的成员,那么很可能你已经被这些问题搞得头疼不已。很快,所有企业的管理层都得给出自己的答案,即便只有部分员工返岗上班也是如此。

而在返岗办公的企业还在为实现“新常态”努力时,那些全面推行远程办公的企业则完全无需为这些问题发愁,它们可以集中精力实施办公远程化转型带来的各种选择。这种办公环境的巨大变化将会为数字化转型注入强大动力。“远程优先”的企业因为不用为办公室操心,所以能够拥有更高的灵活性,打造一支更优秀、更高效也更有韧性的员工队伍,这种前所未有的优势将给企业带来意想不到的商机。

大多数企业无疑还是会回到办公室办公。经过一段时间的调整后,“新常态”也将成型。如果大家能以合作、透明的方式解决各种返岗问题,那么就会一同创造一个健康、欢乐的氛围,让大家在分开工作许久之后,对重新回到一块办公的价值有更深刻的感悟。

但或许因为员工远程办公的效率完全能够满足企业运营需要,肯定也会有企业觉得现在没有必要回办公室办公。

对于这样的企业,我们建议他们考虑全面推行远程办公。虽然会遇到许多挑战,但远程办公能为企业和员工带来的机遇也同样巨大。全力拥抱这种新局面,通过不断学习、试验、迭代找到适合自己远程办公方式的企业,将最有机会打造出一支充满韧性的员工队伍,也最有机会从数字化转型中受益。(财富中文网)

布莱恩•卡登是InVision公司首席市场官。

译者:Feb

过去数周,许多知名企业,包括推特、Facebook和Nationwide在内,都因为颁布新政、允许员工在家办公而登上了新闻头条。但显然,有关讨论中并未提及部分远程办公和全面远程办公的重要区别。

各家企业都在公告中表示,办公室并不会完全消失,企业只是对其优先级进行了重新排序。虽然大胆转向远程工作的举措备受欢迎,但截至目前,尚未有一家知名企业宣布自己将会完全抛弃办公室,各方更多地是在缩小办公室规模,或者增加远程办公的比重。这些企业既没有选择完全远程办公,也没有选择完全在办公室办公,只是试图在两者之间谋求一种新的平衡。

而我想提出的则是一个完全不同的选项,也是一个迄今为止乏人关注的选项:全面远程办公。

在我担任首席市场官的InVision,我们自2011年创办以来就一直在远程办公,我们将这种工作方式称为“完全分布式”的办公方式。InVision共有约700名员工,遍布在从西雅图到新加坡的全球各地,但无论是在哪里,大家全都没有自己的办公室,只有为数不多的几处共享办公空间,如同在家庭办公室的海洋中徜徉的几叶扁舟。没有中心化办公室、员工分布式办公正是数字化产品设计与开发软件企业InVision的典型特征。

部分远程办公与全面远程办公之间存在着巨大差异,这是因为两者会带来截然不同的体验。

就像许多人在新冠疫情期间经历过的那样,如果大家都在远程办公,那么同事之间会产生一种同志之情,也更容易产生同理心,进而增进彼此之间的情谊。如此一来,全体员工都能体验到远程办公带来的优势及其存在的挑战。大家使用的工具别无二致,遵从的流程也并无不同,这样就可以为所有员工打造一个公平的竞争环境,让大家不受距离影响,都能成为企业文化不可或缺的一份子,并因此而齐心协力工作。

如果有部分员工在办公室工作,另一部分员工却在远程工作,就会造成两种不同的工作体验。

有些会议在办公室开,有些则在线上举行。有些员工能拿到各种津贴和福利,其它员工则没有。流程本应人人遵守,但执行力度却因人而异。同事之间的关系也因为是否在办公室上班而划出了界限。随着时间的推移,这些差异将会被日益放大,并因此凸显出部分远程办公的最大风险:让一家企业分化成为两个不同的组织。

今年早些时候,我们出版了一本有关远程办公的专著。在书籍撰写期间,有一位InVision的员工在接受采访时表示,自己曾经服务于一家部分远程办公的企业,当时的经历让她感觉非常糟糕,以至于对远程办公产生了抗拒心理。“虽然那家企业也很体贴周到,想让远程办公的员工感觉自己也是企业的一份子,但不公平的现象依然存在。”

当然,完全远程办公的组织也会面临自己的挑战。InVision之所以在一些不同城市还留有共享办公空间,部分原因是有些员工无法或不想在家工作。随着InVision规模的不断扩大,有些员工也开始觉得企业缺少凝聚力,这也促使我们在2017年开始举行年度团建活动。自此以后,这种活动就成了我们企业的一种重要文化活动。在我们看来,投入大量时间和资金开展这种活动对员工非常有意义。我们也发现,举办小型团建活动有利于团结员工、建立信任。

相较于全面远程办公的企业,部分远程办公的企业同样面临着激励员工、保持员工参与度、协调员工关系等问题,由于同时存在办公室和居家办公两种形式,势必会导致某种不确定性和混乱,进而产生一些新问题,而这些问题同样需要部分远程办公的企业想办法解决。

那么为什么要全面推进远程办公,而不是干脆放弃远程办公,全都回办公室工作呢?这是因为远程办公有许多优势,诸多商业领袖对这种优势已有深刻认识。远程办公的员工满足感更高、工作倦怠感更低、工作生活平衡也更好。我们知道远程办公可以将员工的生产力提高50%,还能节省一笔办公空间维护费用。企业可以免受空间限制,雇佣全球各地的员工,这也是解决日益严重的“人才紧缺”问题的关键所在。Gartner在2019年对企业高管进行的一项调查显示,“人才紧缺”是各种组织当前面临的最大风险。

而公共卫生事件又给我们向远程办公转型提供了更多理由。

虽然越来越多的企业开始返岗办公,但未来情况会如何发展仍然不明朗。需要错峰排班吗?要不要扩大办公空间,让员工保持更多距离?要不要对进入大楼的人进行检测,看他们是否有流行病相关症状?要不要给那些愿意返岗办公的员工提供额外激励或更高薪水?如果你是某个企业公共卫生事件应对小组的成员,那么很可能你已经被这些问题搞得头疼不已。很快,所有企业的管理层都得给出自己的答案,即便只有部分员工返岗上班也是如此。

而在返岗办公的企业还在为实现“新常态”努力时,那些全面推行远程办公的企业则完全无需为这些问题发愁,它们可以集中精力实施办公远程化转型带来的各种选择。这种办公环境的巨大变化将会为数字化转型注入强大动力。“远程优先”的企业因为不用为办公室操心,所以能够拥有更高的灵活性,打造一支更优秀、更高效也更有韧性的员工队伍,这种前所未有的优势将给企业带来意想不到的商机。

大多数企业无疑还是会回到办公室办公。经过一段时间的调整后,“新常态”也将成型。如果大家能以合作、透明的方式解决各种返岗问题,那么就会一同创造一个健康、欢乐的氛围,让大家在分开工作许久之后,对重新回到一块办公的价值有更深刻的感悟。

但或许因为员工远程办公的效率完全能够满足企业运营需要,肯定也会有企业觉得现在没有必要回办公室办公。

对于这样的企业,我们建议他们考虑全面推行远程办公。虽然会遇到许多挑战,但远程办公能为企业和员工带来的机遇也同样巨大。全力拥抱这种新局面,通过不断学习、试验、迭代找到适合自己远程办公方式的企业,将最有机会打造出一支充满韧性的员工队伍,也最有机会从数字化转型中受益。(财富中文网)

布莱恩•卡登是InVision公司首席市场官。

译者:Feb

Over the past few weeks, high-profile companies, including Twitter, Facebook, and Nationwide, made headlines by announcing new policies that make remote work more available to their workforce. But conspicuously absent from the conversation is an important distinction: the difference between partially remote and fully remote organizations.

Couched in each of the announcements are acknowledgements that the office isn’t fully going away. It is being reprioritized. While the bold decisions to create remote arrangements are welcome changes, to date no well-known company has announced plans to abandon the office entirely. Rather, many are scaling back the office presence or scaling up remote options. Choosing neither fully remote nor fully co-located, these companies have instead opted to negotiate a new balance between the two.

I want to highlight a different option, one that’s received far less attention: going all-in on remote.

InVision, where I’m the chief marketing officer, has been a fully remote company since its founding in 2011. (We call it “fully distributed.”) Our 700 employees are scattered from Seattle to Singapore with no offices anywhere, save for a smattering of coworking spaces, dinghies in a sea of home offices. The lack of a central office and the fact that the entire staff works from anywhere are defining traits of InVision, a digital product design and development software company.

The distinction between partially remote and fully remote is an important one, because the experience between the two is radically different.

As many will have experienced in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, when remote workers are “in it together,” there is a camaraderie and shared understanding that emerges. Friendships develop. Both the benefits of remote work and the challenges inherent in it are experienced by the entire staff. People use the same tools and commit to following the same processes. This can create an equal playing field for all employees and becomes an integral part of the culture that binds people together—despite the distance.

When part of that team moves back to the office, and others stay remote, the experiences diverge.

Some meetings happen in an office; others happen virtually. Perks and benefits apply to one cohort but not another. Processes that should be followed by everyone are unevenly respected. Relationships become divided based on who’s in an office and who’s not. Over time, these differences tend to concretize, revealing the ultimate danger in partially remote workforces: the creation of essentially two different organizations.

One InVision employee, in an interview for a book on remote work we published earlier this year, described her previous experience of working in a partially remote company as “souring” her perspective on remote work entirely. “Even as considerate and thoughtful as they were to ensure remote workers felt included … there was just an inequality of access.”

Of course, fully remote organizations have their own challenges. One of the reasons InVision has maintained coworking spaces in different cities is because in more normal times, there are employees who cannot or choose not to work from home. When InVision began to scale, teammates reported a lack of cohesion, spurring the creation of an annual offsite starting in 2017. It’s since become an important cultural event at the company, and we view its significant time and cost investments as crucial to our employees. We have also found that smaller team offsites provide necessary in-person opportunities to align and build trust.

The difference is that partially remote companies have to solve these same challenges—how to keep people motivated, engaged, and aligned—while also addressing new ones created by the uncertainty and confusion of having a portion of the team working in an office and a portion working from home.

So what is the argument for going all-in on remote work, as opposed to scrapping the idea entirely and returning to the office? Many of the benefits are already well-known to business leaders. Remote workers report better job satisfaction, reduced burnout, and an improved sense of work-life balance. We know that remote work increases employee productivity by as much as 50%. There are the cost savings that come from not maintaining office space. Companies can hire anyone, regardless of location—a key antidote to the growing “talent crunch” problem, which, according to a 2019 Gartner survey of senior executives, is a top risk organizations face today.

But there are also new arguments to be made in the aftermath of the current crisis.

Even as more businesses return to the office, it’s unclear what the situation will look like. Do you stagger working hours? Expand to new space to allow more distance between workers? Do you test people entering the building for coronavirus symptoms? Do you offer additional incentives or higher pay for those willing to go into a physical office? If you’re on a corporate COVID-19 task force, perhaps you’re struggling with some of these very questions right now. Every business leader will soon have to answer them, even if only part of their workforce returns to the office.

While companies returning to the office struggle to achieve a new normal, organizations that go all-in on remote work will be free to focus on realizing the full range of options in their remote transformation. These kinds of dramatic shifts in workplace dynamics can serve as a powerful forcing function for digital transformation. Free from the overhead of an office, remote-first companies will have more flexibility to design a better, more efficient, and resilient workforce than what existed before—leading to unexpected business opportunities.

Undoubtedly, most businesses will decide to return to the office. After a period of adjustment, a new normal will set in. If people work together to problem-solve their way back into the office collaboratively and transparently, that new normal should be a healthy and a happy one, renewed by a deeper appreciation for what it means to be together after spending so much time apart.

But there will be other businesses that decide it does not make sense to return to the office. Perhaps they’ve learned that their biggest concern—whether their employees could be productive working remotely—was satisfied.

To these companies, we encourage them to consider the option of going all-in. While the journey to becoming a fully remote company will be challenging, the opportunities are immense for both the business and your teams. The companies that embrace this new reality to its fullest—those that commit to learn, test, and iterate their approach until they find what works—will be the ones best poised for resilience, and to reap the benefits of digital transformation.

Brian Kardon is CMO of InVision.

热读文章
热门视频
扫描二维码下载财富APP