It occurred on a phone call with a vendor my company uses. We have had some project related issues for some time now and during the course of the call, we found out (not really to our surprise) that the company was having problems retaining project managers. The reason they were having problems, though, was rather interesting.
Because of The Plague of 2020 (and like many other companies) they have had to make decisions about which positions are "critical" and need to be onsite and which positions are "non-critical" and can work from home. In their corporate economy, project management is one of those groups.
But this has not been true everywhere. Other places, project managers can work from home (frankly, like myself). And so they have been unable to keep their project management staff as they flock to other positions that do not require them to be on-site.
It is a small enough thing, but it is having a definite and significant impact on their business.
They only have three choices, really. The first is to continue to do exactly what they are doing (and get the same results). The second is to overcome their corporate culture and redefine onsite versus offsite functions (which will take fighting internal thought battles). The third is that they will simply outsource those sorts of roles completely, either paying top dollar for people to be on site or, equally as likely, paying consultants to work off site (again, likely at top dollar).
This is an argument that more and more businesses are going to have to face the longer The Plague goes on: the fact that for some people, if not for many people, they can work off site and still continue to contribute to the success of their company. From a corporate view it makes a great deal of sense: one does not pay for a great deal of office overhead and still accomplishes the work. From the individual's side, they save money and time on not commuting and the innumerable smaller expenses that go with being at work.
It is not that this will be considered a perk - it has been a perk for certain positions and industries for years. What it will become is not a perk, but an expected part of certain positions and industries. I can easily see a day where having to be on-site for certain positions will be considered requiring an extra pay addition.
The outcome of The Plague of 2020 in terms of changing business and employment expectations and results will follow us for years and years to come.
I hired into this company when it was just beginning to go global. I caught the last of the "family" phase. It fit me. Now, it is a multinational, corporate morass.
ReplyDeleteOn of the people I used to support was a remote admin. When they closed our district office, she was moved to remote status. She remolded her garage into an office, and continued to make itineraries for our senior VP's and such. They recalled her to the main hub in a different state. Her job was no longer remote-able.
She fought that decision because her husband was needed medical help at home, and lost. She managed to stay with a friend there, for about 4 months. The situation was untenable, so she retired early. Within a few months, this pox fell, and everyone was remote-able. "Can I get my job back?" "No, you retired."
I can see your point. Going forward, all those folks that PROVED you don't need an office, saved 2 hours a day driving, and the clothes budget and gas budget will be difficult to recall to the centralized office. But sometimes you need eyes on and hands on to make it work. I'm in that boat. Screwdriver handles don't come in 100 mile lengths...
STxAR, it is true. Even the business I am in (Biopharmaceuticals), you need people to make the product and test the product and do research and ship things and receive things. So they made the essential/non-essential call.
DeleteBut even in that, at some point the Essentials may have clout. For a while the company was paying a premium for people coming in. That went away as the emergency continued - but long term, workers may be able to get that their way as well: "Ya know, if I go to work here and am on-site, I can get..."
That is unfortunate about your friend - but I think a lot of companies are trying conserve cash as well, not knowing how long this will go on.
A successful business is one that is constantly changing and adapting to the current environment. If that isn't a saying, it should be. As an engineer, I have seen a fair share of work that was out sourced, mostly to other countries. A lot of colleagues lost their jobs or got reassigned as a result. It worked for a short time and did save lots of money but eventually the saying above came into play and changes needed to happen to products to stay relevant. But how to you communicate these changes to someone 12 hours of time away and if you do manage to make those changes, what do you do with the six month supply that is in warehouses or boats or semis between here or there? Eventually people started realizing the cost associated with all this and decided that perhaps it wasn't so cheap after all. Gradually all that work came back home again where change is much easier and as it turns out, cheaper.
ReplyDeleteEd, I think it is kind of a saying - or a saying people like to adhere to, even if they do not.
DeleteWhat you have described is played out again and again in the real world (even with a competent company, working in different time zones makes co-ordination difficult at best). You are correct that it is the unrealized cost that originally we did not calculate. We should be able to now, and measure things appropriately.