How To Organize Work So Nobody Hates You?

Organization

During the last 3 years, many of us went through a complete shift of working. We needed to adjust and organize ourselves when the Covid hit, when we could’ve we moved to working from home. The school went home, as well as movie theaters, malls, universities and so on. Our homes became places with multiple functions and we needed to learn how to operate like that without going crazy.

After a while we wanted “normal” so badly that we could’ve done anything to be outside, even a walk around the building became something special. Every trip to the grocery store was an actual event.

And now we are at this place where a lot of us reshaped their lives, changed the way we work, shop, take care of our families and organize free time. We got used to things that before pandemic seemed impossible, like distant learning or working fully remotely. People will adjust to anything when the circumstances push them and that’s what happened to us 3 years back from now.

When we think about working remotely 100%, a lot of research shows that in many cases it doesn’t really matter for whom we click on the computer. We are less attached to the employee and people (especially emotionally), we make faster decisions about the job change. We don’t care that much as long as the conditions are good for us. On the other hand, I remember the times before Covid, when I was in the organization where we built strong connections and even when the times were tough, we did stick together, supporting each other. And many friendships I have from that time are still with me nowadays. Is it even possible without a real human connection and being together in the same room more often to build a value like that?

Should we go hybrid without any specific structure around it? Should we leave people total freedom counting on their good will so they’ll figure that that’s good to be in the office more often? Or should we say to them that we are coming back to the office and they just need to deal with it?

How to organize work environment so nobody hates the firm and don’t quit? Let’s take a look on that.

Hybrid vs remote vs onsite – pros and cons

There are 3 options when we think about organizing work in the company. Each of those has its own pros and cons, taking into consideration two sides of the story: employer and employee. We are going to put both arguments in the same category, so we structure the way of working, not the perspective itself.

What to do when I want to organize work 100% onsite?

Many of us work onsite all the time: Covid or not Covid. Health care, production/industry front line workers, traditional commerce, governmental offices and many more. But when we think about office employees, whose work can be done from home and we want them to work onsite 100% of the time (like mostly was organized before pandemics), we need to take into consideration the main elements. What I gathered is not all of the elements that exist, but my goal here is to show you the broader perspective that can be helpful in making your own decision.

Pros of working 100% onsite:

Everyone is at the same place, at the same time – it allows us as a company to fully use office spaces that we have, to organize events, food, training sessions, meetings or conferences onsite
No one is excluded from what’s happening in the office (because they work remotely)
No troubles with bad internet connection, being distracted by notifications, stimulus from home environment
Quick gathering information from the people that sit next to us, no need to wait until somebody replies to an e-mail or Teams message
The relations are build every day, during office gatherings, meetings or eating together
It’s easier to onboard a new employee (especially when there is a specific technology, equipment in the office), to show them everything onsite
Manager can react faster when something is wrong within the team (the signals are there all the time)

Cons of working 100% onsite:

Limited talent pool (recruiting only in the area/city where the office is located)
High office costs (rent, media, food, maintenance services, commute – if we have it as a benefit for employees etc.)
Noise, being distracted by the other people walking around, asking questions or asking for advice
Commute time
Not comfortable all-size-fits-all office spaces (desks, chairs etc.)

What to do when I want to organize work 100% remote?

During covid, most of the people whose work was possible to do remotely, went home – effective immediately. It was the safest approach, which aim was to stop virus from spreading with keeping business continuity going. For many it was extremely hard at the beginning, especially when they had small apartments and/or kids with a school at home. Many didn’t have proper desk or chair – I literally know about the cases when someone needed to put the ironing board in the toilet and that was their place to have Teams calls.

But, as mentioned before, after a while a person get used to anything when they need to. We organized our “office space” at home as well as possible, we created the rest of our lives somehow around the work and keep going. The impossible before the pandemic became possible, even comfortable for some of us.

Pros of working 100% remote:

No need to keep the office (cutting fixed costs – sometimes a huge amount of money)
Reduce other office-related costs (rent, media, food, maintenance services etc.)
Everyone is remote so it’s easier to organize meetings: always 100% remotely (no inequalities)
We have an access to the whole global talent pool
Employees save commute time that they can invest in their hobbies, spending time with their families or friends etc.
It’s more eco-friendly: we don’t use transportation = we save energy and fuel

Cons of working 100% remote:

There is a risk of no loyalty/low engagement (there is no difference for which organization
“I click on the computer”)
Relations “don’t make themselves on their own” – we need to organize the time and space to build them
When we use the global talent pool and the team becomes more and more diverse, there are cultural differences that may be a big challenge for managers to deal with on a daily basis
It can take a long time to get an answer for a Teams message or an e-mail (when a person is not responsive – I cannot just approach the person and ask a question)
Resistance of turning on the cameras can decrease the engagement in the meetings/workshops as well as in effective management (I don’t see the reactions or emotions of people so I cannot address the situation properly) which can lead to more conflicts, misunderstanding in communication etc.
The trust is harder to build since we don’t have deeper relationship (no trust = no engagement)
If we have troubles with setting boundaries, we can never leave work – the lines can be blurred and our work-life balance can be disrupted
Isolation (not being around other people, even just physically in the same space) in a longer period of time can lead to depression or other mental health disorders – it’s especially connected to the people who live alone (even when they say they don’t need anyone and they’re perfectly fine on their own)
Inequalities in internet connection (some cities/regions have very poor infrastructure so they can’t be on cameras or they lose connection, it crashes all the time) can influence the comfort of work: especially during the calls

What to do when I want to organize hybrid work?

One of the most difficult post-Covid for companies who have office workers is: should we come back to the office? Even when we can see that work can be done well at home, don’t we miss being together at the office? Shouldn’t we try to recreate the relations, atmosphere, shared meals and coffee? But what if our employees will resist and say that they don’t want to do it anymore?

Hybrid work can be done in few different ways, in this article I’ll cover the situation when employer decides that employees should be at the office certain number of days per week/month (let’s say that it’s 2 days in the office, 3 days remote).

Pros of working hybrid:

Building relationships within and between the teams in the office space
Gathering information faster with cooperation onsite with others
Flexibility in organizing remote and onsite days for employees and managers
Possibility to learn how to be more adaptive in planning work (i.e. at home I do individual, focus-needed tasks and at the office I take part in meetings, trainings, workshops, brainstorming sessions, shared meals etc.) which can increase efficiency and effectiveness of work
Diversity of environment (onsite and online) can bring stimuli and reduce the risk of burnout or low engagement
Changing landscape, being among people can protect us from mental health issues (i.e. connected to the isolation while working fully remotely)
Office equipment to use (office space, desks, IT tools, printers, good coffee, better light – i.e. when I can’t afford it or don’t have this quality at home)

Cons of working hybrid:

It’s hard to reorganize life one more time (we did it when the Covid hit, now we need to do it once again)
Some of us moved to the countryside, to another city (or country), so it’s hard to be in the office certain amount of time per week/month
If the days onsite/remote are not repetitive (roughly the same each week), it can be hard to stick to the same structure (i.e. when you have kids and they need to be in certain places at a certain time)
When team members are not on site/remote at the same time, there is no equality (or even possibility) in meetings or workshops (hybrid version doesn’t work at all in my experience in educational practices)
It can be harder for some people to switch more frequently between the work environment (organized at home and in the office)

As we can see, each option has its pros and cons. And it’s almost equal numbers of arguments in each section, so it makes the decision about what to choose even harder. So how to choose wisely?

How to organize work in the constant change?

Many of us experienced multiple changes in the last couple of years.

Globalization of the business, tech boom, wars all over the world, inflation, bad economy.

Covid, waiting for a vaccine so we can “go back to normal” (even when we don’t even know what “normal” means anymore), doing everything at home, isolation, saying “hi” with touching the elbows.

In the organizations we needed to move a lot of work to fully remote mode, sending employees home, often without proper preparation. Managers needed to change the way they manage teams, for many of them if was the first time when they didn’t see their employees in the office space on a daily basis. We needed to adjust our tech solutions, processes, policies and everything that was necessary to keep the business going.

Taking all of that into account, adding the trials of 4-day work week in some countries, the new discoveries of people (many discovered over the pandemic that they don’t want to be in the rat’s corporate race anymore), labor law changes (i.e. in Poland a huge one coming in April), organizations need to rethink how they want to shape their cultures. The question is: how to organize work in the constant change, when we never know what will hit and when? And how to organize it so people live their lives, align work with life, health with growth, family with friends? It’s all one big ecosystem: maybe now it’s even more visible than ever. Is it even a matter of remote/onsite/hybrid choice? Or maybe it’s more employee/human/client or money centric choice?

What decision is the best decision?

I’m an advocate of smart choice and autonomy. Each organization and their culture is different, every business needs something else to work in the best possible way. There is no one-size-fits-all solution that I can give you so the magic starts happening.

If I was in the position of choice, I would go with the smart hybrid solutions, with team meetings, workshops, company conferences and brainstorming sessions onsite, combined with a focused, undisturbed individual time for deep work at home. I believe that that kind of combination will allow us all to feel that we are a part of a great organization and we also have a space and flexibility to manage our lives so we live if fully.

When choosing, think about the holistic approach to the business and life, adaptability and good leadership which allows to make good, smart decisions with having a bigger picture in our heads. Think about different angles of the story: we need to keep business running as well as we want to have a healthy culture with engaged and satisfied employees. And every single employee has their own agenda, needs, personal preferences.

The key is to make it all work so it’s a pleasure to cooperate and just be together.

Shouldn’t it be the ultimate goal for most of us?

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes

Article Rating

0 komentarzy

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Czytaj także

Leadership

3 Leadership Lessons I Learned from Bad Recruitment Processes

Recruitment is often described as both an art and a science—a delicate balance of intuition, data, and strategy. But sometimes, even with the best intentions, things can go awry. I’ve learned this the hard way. Over the years, my experience in leadership have taught me that recruitment mistakes are not just costly in terms of money but also in terms of time, energy, and efficiency. Today, I want to share with you three of my biggest lessons from bad recruitment decisions that I hope will help you to not repeat those in your leadership practice. #1 The Rush: When Speed Wins With Strategy There was a time when I was desperate to fill a position on my team. Aren’t we really in constant situations like that? I remember that we had a critical project coming up, I was drowning under the amount of tasks I had on my list and I convinced myself that having “someone”—anyone—on board quickly was better than waiting for the better fit. I rushed through the process, skipping some of the deeper evaluations and settling for a candidate who seemed “good enough.” The result? It ended up costing me more than I ever anticipated. The person lacked the skills and mindset needed for the role, and within six months, we had to part ways. Not only did this mean starting the recruitment process all over again, but it also disrupted my work, again. According to research by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the average cost per hire is around $4,700. However, if you make a bad hire, the costs skyrocket. Studies estimate that replacing an employee can cost anywhere from 8 to 12 months of their salary. For example, if you hire someone with an annual salary of $50,000, replacing them could cost you between $33,000 and $50,000. And that’s just the financial side—what about the lost productivity and influence on yourself? On the team? This experience taught me a crucial lesson: rushing to fill a position is like building a house on quicksand. It may seem like you’re saving time in the short term, but in reality, you’re setting yourself up for long-term instability. #2 The Bias Trap: Judging by Brands, Not Skills Another mistake I’ve made is being overly impressed by the organizations listed on a candidate’s CV. When someone came from a big-name company or a well-known brand, I found myself assuming they must be ready to do the job. After all, if they worked at such prestigious places, they must be highly capable, right? Wrong. One candidate I hired had an impressive resume filled with experience at top-tier organizations. I was so dazzled by their background that I overlooked some red flags during the interview process—things like their lack of enthusiasm for the role or their vague answers about past achievements. It turned out that their success in previous roles was largely due to the systems and teams already in place at those organizations. In my smaller, more dynamic team, they struggled to adapt and contribute effectively. This mistake taught me to focus on the specific person, not just their past affiliations. A brand name on a CV doesn’t guarantee a cultural, personality-based or skill set fit for your organization. Now, I dig deeper during interviews, asking specific questions about their contributions and how they handle challenges in different environments. #3 Ignoring the Personality Match As someone deeply invested in Communication Intelligence (CQ) and the Process Communication Model (PCM), I know how critical personality dynamics are in any working relationship. Yet, there have been times when I ignored this knowledge during recruitment—and paid the price for it. I once hired someone who looked perfect on paper: they had the right skills, experience, and even glowing references. But what I failed to assess was how well we would work together on a personal level. Our communication styles clashed almost immediately. Where I value directness and proactive problem-solving, they preferred a more passive approach and avoided conflict at all costs. Data vs emotions. Logic vs relationship care. Nothing wrong about that, don’t get me wrong! But it comes with a cost, especially when you work in a small setup. This mismatch didn’t just affect our one-on-one interactions; it also impacted the overall efficiency. When there isn’t alignment between a leader and their team members, it creates friction that slows down decision-making and execution. According to Gallup research, disengaged employees can cost organizations up to 18% of their annual salary in lost productivity. Imagine what happens when that disengagement spreads across an entire team! Now, I make personality assessments a non-negotiable part of my recruitment process. Tools like PCM are there to use: I’m not saying that you do a questionnaire for every single candidate since it’ll cost a lot (if you can afford it, go for it!). It’s about using the framework in practice. Listen, observe, connect the dots. Everything is there, you just need to know what you’re looking for. Moving Forward: How to Avoid These Pitfalls Here’s what I’ve learned to do differently: Prioritize Fit Over Speed: Take the time to find someone who aligns with your team’s needs and culture—even if it means extending your search timeline. Remember that fast recruitment can cost you so much more time in the future. Dig Deeper Into Experience: Don’t be swayed by big names on a CV; focus on understanding what the candidate actually contributed in their previous roles. Assess Personality Compatibility: Use tools like PCM or other personality assessments or knowledge from the framework to ensure alignment between you and your potential hire. Recruitment is never going to be an exact science, but by learning from past mistakes and implementing more thoughtful strategies, you can significantly improve your chances of finding the right person for your team—and avoiding costly missteps along the way. Final Thoughts As leaders, we often feel immense pressure to make quick decisions and keep

Czytaj dalej

16 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

Mastering Tough Conversations: A Tech Leader’s Guide to 1:1s (That Nobody Really Wants to Lead)

As a tech leader, you’re no stranger to challenges—tight deadlines, complex projects, and ever-evolving technology are part of the job. But one of the most delicate challenges you’ll face doesn’t involve code or systems; it involves people. Leading tough conversations with employees is an essential skill that separates good leaders from great ones. Whether it’s addressing underperformance, delivering hard feedback, or navigating team conflicts, these moments can define your leadership. This guide equips you with actionable tools to lead tough conversations effectively, using a structured approach that combines contracting, Communication Intelligence (CQ), including the Process Communication Model (PCM). Let’s dive in. When Tough Conversations Are Necessary: Scenarios You’ll Encounter Before we get into the how, let’s identify the when. Here are common situations where a tough conversation might arise: Underperformance: An employee is consistently missing deadlines or delivering work in a quality we agreed on. Behavioral issues: A team member exhibits disruptive behavior, such as frequent conflicts with peers or unprofessional communication. Career Development: You need to inform an employee that they didn’t receive a promotion or that their role is changing. Restructuring: Delivering news about layoffs or departmental changes. Personal Concerns: Addressing sensitive issues like burnout, mental health, or personal struggles impacting performance. Each of these scenarios requires a thoughtful approach to ensure the conversation is productive and respectful. And none of those are easy: there’s no one-size-fits-all approach so it might sound like a hell to a tech leader. But we have some algorytms that you can use to run the meeting with success. The Framework: Contracting, CQ, and PCM To handle these conversations effectively, use three elements to have a success no matter what kind of situation you are facing. Contracting: Establish clear agreements on three levels—administrative, professional, and psychological. You have more about the contracting itself, the levels and what to do to make sure the contract is fully covered in this article. Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle: Flex your communication style to meet the employee where they are emotionally and mentally. Managing reactions that are always emotional (you like it or not) is our job as leaders: we need to know what triggers which behavior and what to do to overcome or address it when it appears. Process Communication Model (PCM) Framework: Tailor your approach to the employee’s personality base for maximum impact. Match the language and way of communication they need, not your favorite ones. That’s crucial for the conversation to be successful: you’re leading it for them, not for yourself. Part 1: Contracting—Setting the Stage for Success Contracting involves creating clarity and mutual understanding before diving into the conversation. What are the essentials of 3 levels that are inside? – Administrative Contracting: Define the logistics. Where will the meeting take place? How long will it last? What’s the agenda? Example: “Let’s meet in my office at 2 PM for 30 minutes to discuss your recent project performance.” Take care of this during and after as well. “What is the deadline to implement what we’re talking about?” – Professional Contracting: Clarify roles and expectations. Emphasize that this is a professional discussion and its goal is to find solutions, not to blame anybody for anything. Example: “My role is to provide feedback and support you in improving; I would like for your role to share your perspective and be engaged in the next steps we are going to create together during this meeting.” – Psychological Contracting: Set the emotional tone by creating a space for a person. Acknowledge that the conversation might be difficult but make sure you are focused on the positive outcome. Example: “I know this might be uncomfortable, but I want you to know this is coming from a place of support and wanting to help you succeed.” Part 2: Flex Your CQ Muscle Communication Intelligence (CQ) is your ability to adapt your communication style based on the situation and the other person’s needs and preferences. In tough conversations, this means balancing focus with accountability. What are the easiest 3 things that you can do as a leader to make sure you’re using your CQ muscle? – Listen Actively: Truly hear what the employee is saying without interrupting or jumping to conclusions. Make notes. Paraphrase, check if you understand as your employee intended you to. Don’t assume, ask. – Acknowledge Emotions: If the employee feels upset, angry or defensive, name the emotion without judgment. Example: “I can see this feedback is frustrating for you.” or “I understand that situation is infuriating.” Don’t underestimate the state, let it be, check what kind of information is hidden below this emotion. Use it in the solution creation phase. – Stay Calm and Focused: Keep your tone steady and avoid escalating tension, even if emotions run high. I know that’s one of the hardest things to do: most of the time we go angry when the other person is angry. We mirror each other, that’s how our brain is wired. But by being conscious of that, we can stop the automatic pattern and break it by being more mindful and goal-oriented. When you observe something like that, say to yourself: “What is the goal of this conversation? What I want to achieve here?” That kind of reminder is going to take you back to the OK-OK state and continue with more clear view of mind. Part 3: Tailor Your Approach with PCM—Speak Their Language The Process Communication Model (PCM) identifies six personality types, each with unique communication preferences and stress patterns. Understanding these types allows you to tailor your message effectively. Here’s a quick breakdown: Thinker: Logical, organized, values data and structure. – Approach: Be clear, factual, and provide detailed explanations. – Stress Behavior: May become overly critical or perfectionistic, attack others for lack of thinking or logical approach. Persister: Principled, dedicated, values integrity and commitment. – Approach: Appeal to their sense of purpose and principles. – Stress Behavior: May become judgmental or

Czytaj dalej

8 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

What Are Most Common Beliefs That Hold Tech Leaders Back?

As a Tech Leader, you’re tasked with guiding innovation, meeting deadlines, and managing diverse teams—all while navigating the complexities of human dynamics. It’s no small challenge. But what if I told you that some of the beliefs you hold about leadership might actually be holding you back from creating an environment where people want to stay and thrive? Let’s take a closer look at three of the most common beliefs that I encounter when working with Tech Leaders and explore actionable solutions to shift your mindset and approach. Belief 1: “If I’m not the expert in the room, I’ll lose respect.” Many Tech Leaders feel immense pressure to always have the answers. After all, you’ve likely climbed the ranks because of your technical expertise. But leadership isn’t about being the smartest person in the room—it’s about enabling others to shine (it hurts, I know). The problem is that when you focus on showcasing your expertise, you risk micromanaging or overshadowing your team’s contributions. This can stifle creativity and lead to disengagement: your people think won’t have enough space to try out new solutions, make mistakes and learn from them to build their own expertise. Solution? Shift from being the “expert” to being the “facilitator.” Ask open-ended questions like, “What do you think we should do here?” or “How can we approach this differently?” Empower your team to take ownership of their ideas and solutions. Remember, respect is earned not by knowing everything but by fostering trust and collaboration. Belief 2: “Feedback will demotivate my team.” I often hear leaders say they avoid giving constructive feedback because they fear it will hurt morale. While it’s true that poorly delivered feedback can cause friction, avoiding it altogether is far more damaging in the long run. The problem is that without feedback, your team doesn’t know where they stand or how they can improve. This ambiguity can lead to frustration, disengagement, and even turnover: all those things are not the ideal situation for you, as a leader, and for your team as well. There are very costly: losing one employee is a cost of 8-12 monthly salaries of this person (in average). Solution? Reframe feedback as an opportunity for growth rather than criticism. Use a structured approach, even the most common ones like “Start-Stop-Continue” will be a huge help (and easy to implement): – Start: What new behaviors or actions could help them grow? – Stop: What habits or approaches might be holding them back? – Continue: What are they already doing well that they should keep up? Deliver feedback with using Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle, tailor the communication to your employee’s needs, be specific, and always tie it back to their potential and goals. Belief 3: “People leave because of better opportunities, not because of me.” It’s easy to blame external factors when someone leaves your team—higher salaries, exciting projects elsewhere, or personal reasons. While those factors do play a role, research consistently shows that people leave managers, not companies. The problem is that assuming turnover is out of your control absolves you of responsibility for creating a supportive environment. This mindset prevents you from addressing underlying issues within your team dynamic. Solution? Conduct regular one-on-one check-ins where you ask questions like: – “What’s one thing I could do to support you better?” – “Do you think that you’re challenged and fulfilled enough in your role? If not, what can we do to move a needle here?” – “What’s your long-term vision, and how can I help you get there?” By showing genuine interest in your team’s well-being and career aspirations, you’ll build loyalty and reduce turnover. It’s not so obvious to have a leader that actually care and think about their employees’ in more holistic approach. The bottom line Leadership is as much about unlearning as it is about learning. By challenging these common beliefs and adopting a more people-centric mindset, you’ll not only become a stronger leader but also create a work environment where people feel valued and inspired to stay. Remember: great leaders don’t just manage tasks—they cultivate trust, growth, and connection. That’s the kind of environment people don’t want to leave. Ready to challenge more leadership beliefs? Go and listen to the latest episode of Leman Tech Leadership Podcast!

Czytaj dalej

1 February 2025 No Comments