Close this search box.

How To Organize Work So Nobody Hates You?

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?



0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
0 komentarzy
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Czytaj także

Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Thinker

Do you have around yourself people that speak data and facts? That connects the dots all the time, since things need to make sense for them? That kind of people that are concrete, to the point and doesn’t what to waste time on meaningless discussions and rather focus on things that matter? That’s the Thinker. The second out of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE and then we’ve described Persister, as the first stop on our journey to know them all better. Why is it important to characterize all of them? Because thanks to that you’ll know the whole spectrum of the types, so when you talk to somebody, you can make a strong hypothesis about their personality Base to tailor your communication. And because we communicate with others all the time, it’s crucial to have the maximum number of useful tools and practices so we don’t waste time on insufficient communication. At least that’s what the Thinker will say haha.   How do we recognize Thinker?   Thinker is a person who experience the world through the lens of data, facts and logic. Their perception is thoughts since they use their rational part of themselves the most frequently. They always look for logic in what is happening in their life, when they get a task, project or want to decide on something. The things around them need to have structure, and they want a lot of things to make a structure around them as well. So, things have their own place, they plan their time: privately and professionally. How to recognize a Thinker in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Thinker it will be: “I think…”, “The data says…”, “The logic says…”, “The logical choice will be…”, “The most accurate solution in this case is…”, “The chart shows that…”, “The data in the report give us…”. They say all of that because for them what’s rational and backed up with data, is valuable. If something has some gaps, there is not enough information, numbers or facts, the Thinker won’t do it. They will look for more evidence, gather more knowledge, examples or cases and then, when they have it all, they are comfortable with making a former decision. The recognition of Thinker is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time their face is “flat”, there’s not a lot of mimics on it. Their voice is rather monotonous, stable, as well as their body. They don’t overspend the energy on moving their bodies or use unnecessary gestures. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Thinker in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person?   What does Thinker need in communication?   The Thinker needs communication process where they have a chance to express their thoughts. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can think, connect the dots, create logical solutions to the problems that occur. To be efficient in communication with Thinker, we need to use requestive channel of communication (as we did with the Persister). The difference is that we ask Persister “what do you believe…” and we ask Thinker “what do you think…”. That means that we need to ask questions about their thoughts on a certain subject. Using the same example that we got in the Persister’s case: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be telling them about it and then ask about their thoughts on it. “Okay, here is a task X… What do you think we need to do to complete it efficiently?” Asking that kind of question is something that we can do to get in contact with the Thinker. Once they are on board, we can talk about the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.). They value Democratic interaction style. It means that they are good in exchanging thoughts, ideas, solutions. They want to be asked on what they think. They like discussions, brainstorming sessions, but only when they are concrete and not too long. One of the worst things that we can do while getting in contact with Thinker is to use directive communication channel, but they also don’t really like the emotive (too much energy) and comforting (they don’t need all those emotions). But especially telling them what to do without even asking is something that they hate. When they have an autocratic person on the other side of the conversation, they go into aggressive behaviors. By being in that zone there is a huge possibility that they’re going to attack other people. So democratic interaction style and requestive communication channel is a key to success in getting on the same page with that person. Thinker seek to answer the existential question: am I competent? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Thinker is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth.   I’m competent = I’m valuable as a person   Motivational needs attached to this PCM type are recognition of efficient work and time structure. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Thinker goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Recognition of efficient work means that we are seen as people for what we deliver at work and this delivery is with an exact (or better) outcome that we agreed on. Time structure means that we need to put things in order: when we plan our day, and something comes up, we don’t take it easily (especially then the thing that came up is an additional task that we get, outside

Czytaj dalej
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Persister

Do you know at least one person that always has an opinion on a given subject? That has a strong set of values and that is the base of most of the decisions that they make? The person that is trustworthy: when they say that something is going to be done, it will, 100%? That’s Persister. First out of six personality types in Process Communication Model (PCM), the concept created by Taibi Kahleb. You can read shortly about the concept HERE, to have a basic structure around what PCM is really about. Today, I would love for us to have a description of who the Persister is, how we recognize this type is in the other person’s Base. Meaning that it is their first floor of personality structure, where they have most of the resources, competencies, and skills. The Base also stands for what is the most natural way of communication for the other person and through what kind of lenses they observe the world. So today we are going to discover who the Persister is, how to navigate when this person is in front of us and what to do to communicate effectively. How do we recognize Persister? Persister is a person who evaluates the world around them by comparing it to their values and beliefs. Their perception is opinions, and a lot of situations with Persisters relate to comparing one thing to another. How they feel, how they think and how they operate daily against the law, rules, policies, ways of working. While being around people, they’re loyal, and they value trust. They always keep promises: for a Persister it is impossible to even think about not keeping the word. If they say they do something, they are going to do it, no matter what. So, we don’t need to ask them several times a question like: “Are you going to go to do it? What is the progress of it?” because they’ll always do it (in fact, that kind of questions drive Persister crazy). How to recognize this person if that we don’t have their personality structure yet? You can listen to the words they need. For Persister it will be: “I believe…”, “in my opinion…”, “we should do something” or …shouldn’t do something”, “I trust…”, “the important thing for me is…”, “the crucial thing is…”. They say those words because they see the world through the lenses of opinions and values: that’s how Persister is the most visible. Of course, we are talking about being in OK-OK zone. It’s about having an opinion, but also always having a good intention. It’s not about pushing the opinion no matter what or aiming to hurt others. They have an opinion on every single subject and even if they don’t (i.e., they’re not interested in something), they have an opinion on it. Like: “Ok, so I’m not into politics because it really doesn’t interest me: I don’t want to waste my time on that subject”. Based on that example, we can see that there is always an opinion, even if at the first sight there’s none. What is also important that Persister doesn’t have any problem with saying those opinions out loud. And it’s not about being rude: it’s about being persistent, having a voice that matters (in professional and/or private life). Of course, HOW the opinion is communicated is important (it needs to be said from the OK-OK perspective). If it’s not – it’s another part of the story. What do Persister need in communication? I’m trustworthy = I’m valuable as a person When do we know that Persister is in distress? What does to be in distress mean? Being a distress means that we don’t have our motivational needs covered and we go into a sequence that is aligned with certain PCM type. So, if you have a Persister on the other side of the communication process and their needs are frustrated, they go into distress, you will see 3 steps of the sequence. Being in distress means that we don’t think clearly. When it happens, we don’t have access to our skillset, abilities to deal with different (especially stressful and difficult) situations, we can’t act accordingly (even if we rationally know how to do it). That’s why it’s so important firstly to come back to OK-OK, to our Base, and then – once we are there, go and deal with the situation. That kind of approach is always going to work, regardless of the PCM type. It’s worth to remember the sequence, since it is repetitive. By training ourselves in recognizing patterns we train our muscle of reacting accordingly, without going into distress ourselves. The mask invites the mask: meaning that behavior under distress will have influence on us, and even if we are in OK-OK zone, we can go into the dark side. Being aware of what’s happening gives us tools to protect ourselves and support others in getting into better place. The bottom line Persister is a great person to cooperate with. When they say that they’ll do something, we can be sure that will happen, no matter what. We don’t even need to doublecheck: for Persisters it’s impossible to not deliver the things that we agreed on, it’s in their DNA to do it. Their strong principles, values, and a high-level need to be trustworthy make them great partners in crime. Of course, while being in distress, they lose access to those resources and go into not so shiny place. It requires more awareness, being mindful what happens with us (if we are Persisters in Base), and other people (when Persister is on the other side of communication process).    So, I invite us all to observe those behaviors described in the article starting today. It can help us more than we think, regardless of the type of relation, context, or situation that we are in. It’s always worth to develop in this area. PS. As a first exercise after reading this article,

Czytaj dalej

Team Conflict: Is It Always a Bad Thing?

When we hear “conflict”, we think “trouble”. When we hear “conflict”, we think “dysfunctional team”, where communication doesn’t work, and people have personal issues. Or when we hear “conflict”, we think that leader doesn’t know how to lead his/her team successfully. Is that really true? Why are we so scared of a conflict? What is the worst thing that can happen when there is a conflict in the team? What kind of experiences we have with the conflict that make us think and behave in a certain way when one appears? Why do we avoid conflict? The real question should be: why do we avoid doing things in overall? In the area of conflicts, it’s extremely visible: we avoid it, because we burned ourselves once or twice. Based on that we make this strategy to not get involved in any kind of “risky” situation: so, we sit quiet and just focus on living through another day. Is it really the best option we can get? When a lack of conflict is dysfunctional, not the other way around? One of the biggest experts of team development and leadership, Patrick Lencioni, years ago wrote a book “5 Disfunctions of a Team”. It is a really short story (doesn’t even look like a personal/professional development book), yet it’s very powerful. And there is one part that stopped me when I first read it: Lencioni says that one of the dysfunctions of a team is a fear of conflict. What? (On the chart on the left-hand side there are definitions of all disfunctions and on the right-hand side there are solutions, that answer the questions: what is the best thing we can do here for our teams?) If we stick to our old believe that a conflict is something negative and destructive – that it ruins the trust and good atmosphere in the team, how is it possible that it’s actually the other way around? When we avoid conflict, not speaking up and be open about what do we really think, feel, or observe in the workplace, there is a huge risk of not being as effective and efficient as possible. It’s also short sided: if we are not sharing it now, it’s going to backfire in the future. So, at the end of the day, it will bring worse result than we imagine now. What’s even worse, people probably will talk behind other colleagues’ or leader’s backs, and not saying anything out loud. We can imagine that it will bring even worse outcomes, like really ruining the atmosphere, creating space for psychological games and in a consequence: lack of trust. The fear of conflict can be one of the biggest barriers that will stop people from growth, thrive and being the best versions of themselves in a workplace. What can we do to change this mindset? How can we use conflict that nourishes our team? The key thing to understand is that a certain kind conflict is something that we can use. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t, it really depends on what we are dealing with. There are 2 categories of conflicts, I call them functional and dysfunctional. What can we do with the dysfunctional conflicts? First and foremost: we need to map and name correctly which conflict is the real one in the situation we are dealing with. Without that, even the most beautiful strategy is not going to work, because we are going to answer to the wrong need. We’ll get frustrated and use all our energy badly. Focus on investigating will bring the best results, since then the solutions will be to the point: it’s more than certain that it’s worth investing time in this process. The bottom line The conflict is a huge, hairy, and scary thing that we often have very strong convictions about. We avoid it, by staying low, don’t speak up to not get into any confrontation. We do it because we don’t want to get hurt, expose ourselves to bad emotions, stress or feeling that we do not belong. Perfectly natural, there is nothing to be ashamed of. When we make a mindset shift: from fixed (focused on avoiding conflict) to a growth one, where we take into consideration that the conflict can be good for us, nourishing and interesting, we can gain more than we think. With remembering about having a good intention, being in OK-OK zone and with a goal of creating something extraordinary as a consequence of a passionate discussion, we can achieve the outcome that won’t be possible to achieve on our own. It puts old, good conflict in a completely new light. I believe it’s worth trying if it fits.

Czytaj dalej
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x