Today, everyone teleworks, at least in the world of intellectual services. And everyone explains and rejoices at the ease with which the changeover has taken place, both quickly and efficiently. We even wonder why we didn't do it sooner! Yes, it is the constraint that creates adhesion! Moreover, at Akeance Consulting, we share this enthusiasm even if the nomadic nature of our business has contributed greatly to this adaptation.
And it has become so obvious that some companies have already made a definite organization with a mandatory telework period. One transportation service group has 2 days of mandatory telework. Another group has even decided 3 mandatory telework days. The ECB itself is said to be considering such a work organization. Of course, this so-called "compulsory" telework s accompanied by differentiation according to the different professions, modularity according to the populations within a same department, or a rotation of teams in the office.
Aren't all these "definitive" decisions a little fast?
Indeed, the drawbacks of remote work are starting to be heard. There are foreseeable downsides, such as the constraints of less equipment at home (computers, screens, printers, etc.) which already mean that traders or architects will need their office. Less expected drawbacks such as the difficulty to evaluate consultants through a computer screen. The opposite side of the table makes the exchanges less wise and fair. Or the contradictory exchange on an audit report / on a diagnosis is significantly more difficult during a videoconference.
More generally, isn't the flexibility and speed of reaction of a company due to the simple and effective arbitration of a multitude of mini-problems or problems on a daily basis by multi-functional teams? The famous: "Hello? Are you at your desk? Well, I'll come and see you! "which translates this efficiency, is it not necessary every day in the company?
Of course, this particular situation teaches us a lot about our ability to adapt, but we must be careful not to make experiences that would lack depth.