Three Years Later
Earlier this year I attended the ACEC Coalitions Winter Meeting in Tampa. One of my favorite parts of the two-day program is the Business Roundtable, where attendees suggest topics for discussion among the participants. Recent topics have included firms’ plans for pay increases, recruitment and retention strategies, and tactics for increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion. With the writing of this editorial in mind, prior to the session I suggested to the moderator the subject of remote work, and how the attendees view it three years since the pandemic’s onset. The moderator just rolled his eyes and said, “Not that topic again!” and laughingly agreed to include it in the list of potential discussion points . As it turned out, a lively conversation ensued concerning the participants’ experiences with remote work and the associated company policies they’ve implemented.
The time spent discussing remote work during the roundtable was informative, confirming some self-evident observations while offering insights into effective remote work practices. The following is a summary of comments from the roundtable participants.
Most of the firms in attendance have some form of remote work policy, ranging from “We hope to see you again sometime” to a restrictive one day a week or less. There was consensus that some office time is necessary to maintain morale and promote corporate culture. Some firms have designated in-office days, while others require in-person attendance at company meetings. Many firms offer incentives to attract staff to the office, such as free lunches, dedicated workstations, or frequent in-office get-togethers.
From a demographic perspective, younger staff tend to prefer being in the office, for the social interaction as well as for the on-the-job learning opportunities. Staff with younger families prefer the flexibility of remote work, and while many of the senior staff enjoy working remotely, they balance that with their in person mentoring and role modeling responsibilities.
Nearly all participants agreed there are significant benefits to entry-level and junior staff being in the office. Some participants felt that younger staff who have worked primarily in the office were performing significantly ahead of their mostly-remote peers. As to the readiness of entry level staff, there were numerous observations that academic achievement of recent graduates had suffered due to a year-and-a-half of online coursework. I’ve spoken with numerous recent graduates, and all readily admit that remote learning was not nearly as effective as in-person learning, in particular regarding upper-level coursework.
One participant’s firm has increased their onboarding program to expedite cultural indoctrination. Another has beefed up its QA/QC program.
There was little concern about lost productivity. Virtually all firms require timekeeping, which the participants feel encourages accountability. Some firms have a cameras-on policy for internal meetings to discourage attending meetings while standing in line at the grocery store.
There was general agreement that interactions with clients have increased, but most of those connections were of the FaceTime (or Zoom, or MS Teams Meeting) variety. In-person client contact has significantly decreased.
Most firms felt quality has remained the same or improved. There were no reports of claims increases that could be attributed to remote work, although it was acknowledged that given the latency period it may be that claims have yet to surface. One ISO-certified firm did see an increase in “internal audit flags,” and although I don’t know precisely what that means it sounds bad.
And many firms have postponed or abandoned physical office expansion plans.
The final question on the topic was whether remote work has had a positive, neutral or negative impact on participants’ firms. In a show of hands, the vast majority indicated remote work was considered a strong positive within their firms.
As a follow-up to the ACEC Coalitions roundtable discussion, ACEC Coalitions staff conducted a web-based poll of members on their views of remote work. Although a small sample size, the results are worth sharing.
Most poll respondents, nearly 80%, echoed the roundtable attendees in having either a formal or informal hybrid work policy, while a small percentage require daily attendance (allowing for exceptions). Most respondents felt that by many measures (quality, productivity, employee morale) it was business as usual, with little perceived change from pre-pandemic days.
However, there was some divergence from the views of the roundtable participants. A not insignificant number of poll participants, around 20%, felt they are underperforming in many areas, and company profitability has suffered.
One respondent, while acknowledging the benefits to the employee, listed many disadvantages experienced as the employer: a disconnect between firm leaders and the staff; a loss of ad-hoc problem-solving sessions; difficulty in scheduling impromptu meetings; and inefficiencies in the checking process, in particular drawing review. While many of these issues might be overcome with improved office policies, it’s hard to deny the loss of valuable spontaneity in the office dynamic.
So, are there lessons for your firm in this small sampling of responses? I think there are a few:
- There does not seem to be an optimal remote work approach. Remote work policies appear to follow a classic bell curve, with outliers who require full office attendance and those with no restrictions on remote work. Most firms have adopted a two or three-day-a-week in-office requirement.
- Many firms are employing strategies to increase staff engagement, maintain office culture, and promote firm loyalty. Those firms express the highest remote work policy satisfaction rates.
- Quality, productivity, and profitability do not seem to have slipped for most firms.
- The in-office experience has diminished.
Remote work policies will continue to evolve and may at some point coalesce around a consensus in-office workweek. Humans are social beings (even engineers!) and desire some level of in-person interaction. Young staff will develop more quickly and more fully with in-person mentoring. The office work environment is not dead, but workspaces will be adapted to an appropriate density. As the demand for engineers continues to outpace the supply, the flexibility remote work affords will be an essential component to attracting and retaining the engineering firm’s most valuable resource – its staff.