When it comes to workplace models which “fad” should we sign up to..?!
There is a general consensus that hierarchical, walled-up offices with 9-5/Monday-Friday working patterns are a thing of the past, and no longer relevant in this technologically advanced age of the digital and gig economy. But the solution is less clear.
Collaborative workspaces packed with perks and home comforts encourage people to stay at work for as long as possible. This approach was made famous by Google and has been replicated the world over.
However, in the UK the Trade Union Council (TUC) is calling out for a 4-day week with minimal office distractions and a reduction in collaboration areas- A model that has been adopted successfully in Sweden and New Zealand in recent years.
It is fascinating to me that two such contradictory theories could be trending simultaneously, so I wanted to investigate more…
Theory 1: Have more fun at work and work more hours
Made famous by Google, this model has made WeWork (who design and lease these spaces to start ups) billions. WeWork states that they “create environments that increase productivity, innovation and collaboration.” They state that a workplace that encourages collaboration, increases productivity by 15%.
And this is certainly something that Google has attributed to its success. Google’s workspaces are designed so that all levels and hierarchies work collaboratively together. Their spaces encourage disruption and “casual collision” which they believe promotes creativity and drives productivity. Their New York offices were built so that wherever you stand you are within 150 feet of food, meaning staff are encouraged to “snack, chat and inspire more.” All their offices include restaurants, gyms and nap pods, -why would you want to go home!? When I worked at Google, working hours went on until 8pm or 9pm most days.
Theory 2: Work Less and With Fewer Distractions
Ethan Bernstein (Assoc. Professor of Organisational Behaviour at Harvard) found that open plan offices actually reduced workplaceconversations both face-to-face and via email or messaging. Counter-intuitive although this is, mounting research confirms that open plans can make employees feel too exposed and reduce their effectiveness.
Yet research shows that in our traditional workplace model employees are only truly productive 3 hours of the day. By moving to a four-day week model, Andrew Barnes- Founder and CEO of Perpetual Guardian- found that productivity increased by 20% as employees focused their time better. He found staff spent 35% less on social media and profits went up by 18%.
Furthermore, in a study of nurses in Sweden, researchers found that employees were 2.8 times less likely to take time off in a two-week period and that the nurses were able to give a higher standard of care to elderly residents, including 64% more activities with them.
Gregor Gall (Professor of Industrial Relations at the University of Leeds)found that shorter working weeks created happier workers who were more productive and had more of a commitment to their employers. This was certainly the case for Perpetual Guardian who reported a 30-40% increase in staff engagement following the changes.
So, which way to turn?
With both methodologies claiming to increase productivity and engagement of employees, how can we know where to position ourselves?
Google made their revolutionary approach to office working and office space so appealing that it became the popularist way to design and sell office spaces, and millions of offices have been refurbished and renovated in alignment with this model. However the only external and controlled evidence we have, shows that these methods do not enhance communication, productivity or engagement.
So as nice as a massage and prosecco on tap might sound, I say let’s back the TUC and bring on the three-day weekend!