usatoday24
In recent years, many companies have sought formulas to convince their employees to return to offices. The main argument to justify that return to face -to -face was the loss of Equipment cohesion But, above all, the assumption Freezo to innovation and the productivity that Telework had meant.
To appease the employees that they raised in rebellion, the companies implemented Hybrid Day Modelswhich has ended up being the Type of majority day. A Published study In Nature magazine he has just demonstrated that this type of day was the worst option for employees to generate new ideas.
Hybrid work: the hook to return to the office. The hybrid work model, which allows us to work a few days from home and others from the office, has been presented as the ideal solution for combine the best of both worlds However, a recent study by researchers from the universities of Essex and Chicago maintains that this modality could be having A negative effect Unexpected: Innovation in organizations is braking.
The Promise of hybrid work has been raised as A reward For whom They accept to return to the officeallowing them to telework between one and four days per week. The study analyzes work habits and its impact on the generation of ideas, and reveals that the hybrid model not only does not improve innovation, but also reduces it.
The hybrid model: the most implemented and ineffective option. According to data from the ‘Hays Guide of the labor market 2025’42% of companies have opted for this model of day with a series of face -to -face and others remote days.
The research was carried out with “highly trained technology professionals; practically all have university or advanced titles in an engineering field” working in HCl Technologies, a technological company in India. The study indicates that “during the next hybrid period, the new ideas generation rate decreased.” In addition, it is concluded that “an employee takes about 111 months, or a little over 9 years, generate an idea.” During hybrid work, employees generated an average of 0.007 ideas per month (143 months or just under 12 years).
The model that best lent to the generation of ideas was the 100% face -to -face model, but the results They were very similar to those shown by those workers who made their day 100% remotely.
The importance of being in the same space. Researchers highlight that innovation usually arises from “random and spontaneous interactions among employees.” These interactions can be given both in physical spaces, as well as the office cafeteriaas in virtual environments, through chats or informal channels.
Both work in the office and 100% remote allow employees to share the same space (physical or virtual) and, therefore, facilitate these coincidences and the generation of ideas. In this way, both the face -to -face and remote model can adapt to encourage the generation of ideas through common spaces.
On the other hand, in the hybrid model, “an additional coordination problem arises if some employees are in ‘virtual coffee shops’ while others are in real coffee shops“This makes it difficult for all members to coincide in the same space and at the same time, which reduces spontaneous interaction opportunities.
Where is my team? The researchers emphasize that “innovation falls particularly abruptly in teams that vary greatly between being at home and the office, compared to the less scattered equipment.”
Thus, while office employees can Talk to each other In person, remote employees have the tools to generate these online conversations, and “programming a conversation can be more difficult in hybrid mode.” This lack of coincidence and coordination not only translates into a lower generation of ideas, their quality is also reduced.
Image | Unspash (Redmind Studio)
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings