Why the return to offices is more difficult than the radical shift to remote working

Tom Wright attempts to unpack the channel's return to work.

Adapting to an almost completely remote working model came with varying degrees of difficulty for businesses across the channel.

Some already had workforces that worked from home part of the time, so it was just a case of doing so more often. Others were still very much office based, so it took them a week or two to get up to speed - but, ultimately, they got there.

Given that we were all very much taking it one day at a time back in April, it probably didn't occur to many people that the hardest part would come when the choice of where we work was put back in our own hands. That is where is we are now.

Based on government guidelines it is now safe to open offices, with various precautions in place, while from 1 August businesses have been told to actively encourage employees back to get people spending and stimulate the economy.

So where does this leave the channel?

The challenge comes because we're not in a one-size-fits-all situation - as became clear in a lively panel discussion held as part of our virtual MSP event last week.

Four senior execs discussed, firstly, whether MSPs still need an office - and the answer was a clear yes.

But it becomes trickier when working out what role the office plays. Is it the default working location? Is it there purely for employees that want to use it?

Take Cancom UK, for example. Managing director Martin Hess has been encouraging employees to return to the office since the end of May.

He felt the business had "lost its edge" during the months working remotely and, very honestly, said that service to customers had started to very slightly fall away.

He admitted that the office return was a slow burner, but said that now the vast majority for employees are back working as normal.

Other channel giants, including Computacenter and Bechtle have now started bringing employees back.

SysGroup CEO Adam Binks, however, has virtually the opposite view. He will not be opening offices till at least 1 October, and said that in the future the firm may not need as many offices as it currently has. Service levels have improved since the forced move to remote working, while the vast majority of employees are happy to stay at home.

Of course, every business leader has to make the right decision for their company and the workforce, but it could even be a case of making the decision right down to each individual employee.

Personally, I've found myself able to work longer and be more productive at home - as I'm sure many others have. Cutting out hours of travel a week has been a huge benefit, not to mention the money saved travelling into London.

However I certainly won't be staying 100 per cent remote when our office reopens and I've been working from home a couple of days a week for a while now, so I'm sure I'll be content with the balance.

But I can imagine that for someone who hadn't worked from home until lockdown, and then enjoyed all the benefits, there will be a reluctance to go back to the old work pattern for the sake of it.

The danger is that this clash creates a negative atmosphere in the workplace, or even a desire for that person to join a company with a more flexible approach.

On the other hand, an employee with limited space and an uncomfortable home working set-up may want to be in the office five days a week.

Workers in the IT space will also be aware of the benchmark set by the tech giants, with Google today announcing that the majority of employees can work from home until at least the summer of 2021.

I think it's clear that, at the very least, businesses will now need to give employees a compelling reason to come to the office. Saying "it's just what we do" won't be enough, and I'm not convinced "to create a great culture", will cut it either. There will need to be a real benefit for each individual to be in the office. Otherwise, it could be hard to coax them back.