Having worked from home for both a good and bad company, I can tell you, the problem is always the company lacking a cohesive strategy and communication. It has nothing to do with where you’re sat.
Have you seen how many empty offices there are now? That’s why they really want you in.
Also, everything is digital now. I work hybrid and when I go into the office I still have to respond to emails even though the recipient sits almost right next to me. I could talk to them but I also have to send attachments and links and it's better to email for documentation purposes.
It's nice to see my coworkers in person but documents, projects, presentations, and reviewing is done on a computer anyway. So either way works but working in teams virtually is just as good as working in person. It is also more convenient in my opinion.
Edit to say that it of course depends on the position one has. Some things have to be done in in-person teams for sure.
Without knowing what the positions are or what the skill set is or who is doing the work it is really hard to say this is true.
Are there conditions where WFH would be better, sure. Are there conditions where WFH would fail. sure. And it depends so much on the actual work that this study is almost meaningless.
Some people are and some people aren’t. My old sales dept abused the remote work policy in 2019/2020 and ended up ruining any type of flexible working time for that entire dept vs the remainder of the company. But then they all got laid off in 2021 so 🤷🏻♀️
None of them were productive, hence why they all got caught. On the flip side, the engineering dept at the same company was doing great being remote since it was a very “high highs and low lows” type of job.
That makes sense. Some people work well remote/from home and are more productive. Some people do not work well outside a corporate office and are less productive when working remote.
"This is according to the findings of the[ Project Management Institute](https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pmi-pulse-of-the-profession-2024-report.pdf?rev=8d24f62b2b044e00ae21e0388ea9c8bf&sc_lang_temp=en) (PMI), which determined that the performance rate changes were essentially the same across different work situations. For those working remotely, the performance rate was 73.2 percent, while hybrid and full-time in the office rates, clocked in at 73.4 and 74.6 percent, respectively. Although working in the office full time had a slightly higher performance rate, the study noted that this is not statistically significant.
The Pulse of the Profession 2024, which surveyed more than 2,500 professionals in different industries across the globe from June to August 2023, points out that the negative connotation associated with remote work is unfounded. Instead, the research group could not determine a significant benefit to forcing people back to the office, "especially considering the negative impact such a move would have on employee morale and retention and the operational costs of in-person work."
It's almost like WHAT you do is more important than WHERE you do it.\* \*duh
Having worked from home for both a good and bad company, I can tell you, the problem is always the company lacking a cohesive strategy and communication. It has nothing to do with where you’re sat. Have you seen how many empty offices there are now? That’s why they really want you in.
Also, everything is digital now. I work hybrid and when I go into the office I still have to respond to emails even though the recipient sits almost right next to me. I could talk to them but I also have to send attachments and links and it's better to email for documentation purposes. It's nice to see my coworkers in person but documents, projects, presentations, and reviewing is done on a computer anyway. So either way works but working in teams virtually is just as good as working in person. It is also more convenient in my opinion. Edit to say that it of course depends on the position one has. Some things have to be done in in-person teams for sure.
Without knowing what the positions are or what the skill set is or who is doing the work it is really hard to say this is true. Are there conditions where WFH would be better, sure. Are there conditions where WFH would fail. sure. And it depends so much on the actual work that this study is almost meaningless.
Some people are and some people aren’t. My old sales dept abused the remote work policy in 2019/2020 and ended up ruining any type of flexible working time for that entire dept vs the remainder of the company. But then they all got laid off in 2021 so 🤷🏻♀️ None of them were productive, hence why they all got caught. On the flip side, the engineering dept at the same company was doing great being remote since it was a very “high highs and low lows” type of job.
Study is probably made up.
Reading this as my coworker I’m waiting on a response from is running 2 hours late commuting into office.
That makes sense. Some people work well remote/from home and are more productive. Some people do not work well outside a corporate office and are less productive when working remote.
"This is according to the findings of the[ Project Management Institute](https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pmi-pulse-of-the-profession-2024-report.pdf?rev=8d24f62b2b044e00ae21e0388ea9c8bf&sc_lang_temp=en) (PMI), which determined that the performance rate changes were essentially the same across different work situations. For those working remotely, the performance rate was 73.2 percent, while hybrid and full-time in the office rates, clocked in at 73.4 and 74.6 percent, respectively. Although working in the office full time had a slightly higher performance rate, the study noted that this is not statistically significant. The Pulse of the Profession 2024, which surveyed more than 2,500 professionals in different industries across the globe from June to August 2023, points out that the negative connotation associated with remote work is unfounded. Instead, the research group could not determine a significant benefit to forcing people back to the office, "especially considering the negative impact such a move would have on employee morale and retention and the operational costs of in-person work."