As always, thorough work by Brian! My thought about “3 days” is a curiosity about if that turns into a T,W,Th “workweek”, kinda like what happens when the 4 week thing turns into a Friday off reality.
Also, collecting data at the group/team level is harder than what most surveys do at the individual level….
I’m still not clear on what the ‘data’ is…they talk about people ‘thriving’ but define that as ‘energised and empowered to do meaningful work’.
What is the ‘data’…was it simply how many people ticked a box that said ‘yes’ when asked if they felt that way? And also ‘yes’ that it was due to being in the office sometimes? It still feels rather vague and subjective to me.
The examples given of good times for in person are great but don’t require a great mountain of data to come up with them.
It’s also telling that managers with a lack of imagination/skill are relying on policy over accountability to find what is right for their teams is cited as a reason for doing this…come on HR, step up!
No single measure is perfect, by any stretch. Thriving, and Microsoft's measurement of it, may not be either. The factor that gives it some credit is that it's not a new measure: they've been using it for years, and Dawn has been talking about it and sharing more about it. An example from a 2022 HBR article below.
I would agree on the point of managers figuring out what's right with teams; I'm ok with a guideline as a baseline, but strong preference that teams are allowed variation -- there's too much variation within teams otherwise.
Thanks for the link Brian, an insightful article for sure. Interesting how it highlights that managers are doing a good job of empowering and supporting teams but it seems struggling to handle flexible working. An indication that more work needs to be done to help managers with this new skill need.
I’m still not getting a sense of what data is backing up the in person decisions…there’s no apparent correlation with the high scores and physical location. Even if there were, ensuring a causation link would be needed too.
it’s fascinating to see how this is evolving now we’ve (I hope) passed the early kneejerk assumption and cost driven arguments. Thanks for keeping the information coming and discussion moving.
Two years ago, they talked about all the benefits of remote work. Now that they want to reduce their head count without paying severance (what RTO is actually about), they found numbers that show the opposite.
This is entirely self serving for Microsoft. Their executive team has proven that they are not trustworthy, have no loyalty to their employees, and will do whatever they have to do in order to justify what they want.
I understand where you are coming from, but think their intent isn't all of what you're laying out. They still support remote employees -- people aren't being asked to relocate to be with their teams (ala Amazon). They're rolling it out gradually and with 6+ months notice. It's not even clear what happens if people don't comply. And, keep in mind, they've said 50% (2.5 days) since 2021.
In terms of the data, as Dawn said the results themselves have changed over time. That's not completely unexpected: we've been through massive shifts.
I have a hard time giving Microsoft any benefit of the doubt, since they have laid off 15,000 employees since May and have shown a general lack of empathy. Anecdotally hearing stories of people being offered positions and having the offers pulled days before starting (after already leaving their previous position).
Given that 20% of people have a disability I despair at how many "back to the office" programs, initiatives and expectations seem to have a blanket one size fits all policy with no mention of accommodations or flexibility for the people that need them.
Agreed... workplace strategies focused on inclusive design are essential and often overlooked. Involving Employee Resource Groups in ensuring positive work experiences is key.
Data over Dogma
Excellent and balanced as always 👏👏
As always, thorough work by Brian! My thought about “3 days” is a curiosity about if that turns into a T,W,Th “workweek”, kinda like what happens when the 4 week thing turns into a Friday off reality.
Also, collecting data at the group/team level is harder than what most surveys do at the individual level….
And teams matter a lot!
I’m still not clear on what the ‘data’ is…they talk about people ‘thriving’ but define that as ‘energised and empowered to do meaningful work’.
What is the ‘data’…was it simply how many people ticked a box that said ‘yes’ when asked if they felt that way? And also ‘yes’ that it was due to being in the office sometimes? It still feels rather vague and subjective to me.
The examples given of good times for in person are great but don’t require a great mountain of data to come up with them.
It’s also telling that managers with a lack of imagination/skill are relying on policy over accountability to find what is right for their teams is cited as a reason for doing this…come on HR, step up!
No single measure is perfect, by any stretch. Thriving, and Microsoft's measurement of it, may not be either. The factor that gives it some credit is that it's not a new measure: they've been using it for years, and Dawn has been talking about it and sharing more about it. An example from a 2022 HBR article below.
I would agree on the point of managers figuring out what's right with teams; I'm ok with a guideline as a baseline, but strong preference that teams are allowed variation -- there's too much variation within teams otherwise.
Flexibility within a set of principles.
https://hbr.org/2022/06/why-microsoft-measures-employee-thriving-not-engagement
Thanks for the link Brian, an insightful article for sure. Interesting how it highlights that managers are doing a good job of empowering and supporting teams but it seems struggling to handle flexible working. An indication that more work needs to be done to help managers with this new skill need.
I’m still not getting a sense of what data is backing up the in person decisions…there’s no apparent correlation with the high scores and physical location. Even if there were, ensuring a causation link would be needed too.
it’s fascinating to see how this is evolving now we’ve (I hope) passed the early kneejerk assumption and cost driven arguments. Thanks for keeping the information coming and discussion moving.
The headline is really Microsoft makes data say whatever it wants data to say. https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/inspirationgallery/what-we%e2%80%99ve-lost-%e2%80%a6-and-what-we%e2%80%99ve-gained/3836670
Two years ago, they talked about all the benefits of remote work. Now that they want to reduce their head count without paying severance (what RTO is actually about), they found numbers that show the opposite.
This is entirely self serving for Microsoft. Their executive team has proven that they are not trustworthy, have no loyalty to their employees, and will do whatever they have to do in order to justify what they want.
I understand where you are coming from, but think their intent isn't all of what you're laying out. They still support remote employees -- people aren't being asked to relocate to be with their teams (ala Amazon). They're rolling it out gradually and with 6+ months notice. It's not even clear what happens if people don't comply. And, keep in mind, they've said 50% (2.5 days) since 2021.
In terms of the data, as Dawn said the results themselves have changed over time. That's not completely unexpected: we've been through massive shifts.
I have a hard time giving Microsoft any benefit of the doubt, since they have laid off 15,000 employees since May and have shown a general lack of empathy. Anecdotally hearing stories of people being offered positions and having the offers pulled days before starting (after already leaving their previous position).
Given that 20% of people have a disability I despair at how many "back to the office" programs, initiatives and expectations seem to have a blanket one size fits all policy with no mention of accommodations or flexibility for the people that need them.
Agreed... workplace strategies focused on inclusive design are essential and often overlooked. Involving Employee Resource Groups in ensuring positive work experiences is key.
I agree with the concern; my understanding is that you can ask for an exception -- that was mentioned in the original blog post they shared.