{"id":183909,"date":"2017-03-19T16:23:04","date_gmt":"2017-03-19T20:23:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/will-the-gig-economy-make-the-office-obsolete-harvard-business-review\/"},"modified":"2017-03-19T16:23:04","modified_gmt":"2017-03-19T20:23:04","slug":"will-the-gig-economy-make-the-office-obsolete-harvard-business-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/resource-based-economy\/will-the-gig-economy-make-the-office-obsolete-harvard-business-review\/","title":{"rendered":"Will the Gig Economy Make the Office Obsolete? &#8211; Harvard Business Review"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    The gig economy, where independent consultants, contractors,    and freelancers create portfolios of work in lieu of one    full-time job, is transforming the way we work by disconnecting    work from an office. In the traditional jobs economy, employers    often require employee attendance in the office five days a    week, eight hours a day. Gig economy employers, in contrast,    focus entirely on performance, not attendance in the office. It    doesnt matter if the idea for how to solve a problem or the    insight to craft a new strategy is generated in the middle of    the night, or while showering, or in yoga class. The gig    economy employer values the quality of worker results,    not the process by which they are created.  <\/p>\n<p>    The most impactful lesson that traditional companies can learn    from the gig economy is to judge all workers, including    employees, on their results, not on when and where they do    their work.  <\/p>\n<p>    Not one study suggests that working in an office eight hours a    day, five days a week maximizes employee productivity,    satisfaction, or performance. In fact, any data that exists on    work in an office reveals that most employees     arent engaged, waste a lot of time in the office     not working, and that employee underperformance persists    despite the omnipresence of management. Even worse, the direct    costs of maintaining the traditional office-based workplace are    high. CBRE estimates that the typical company in the U.S.    spends     upward of $12,000 per employee per year for office space.    Its hard to find a return-on-investment case for office space,    and much harder still to find any company that makes a    compelling one.  <\/p>\n<p>    Focusing on employee time and location made sense when most    jobs were time and place dependent. Factory workers, manual    laborers, and workers in retail stores, restaurants, or    hospitals have to be at their place of work at specific times    to be productive. Knowledge workers do not. Sitting in an    office cube or in a conference room attending endless,    poorly-run     meetings is unlikely to be how your companys strategic or    product issues are best solved. Nor is it likely to be the most    effective way to create your marketing message, manage your    back office, or maintain secure information systems. Our    greatest insights and most productive work are often generated    outside the constraints of the corporate workweek and the        cube.  <\/p>\n<p>        Study after     study after study    demonstrate that independent, remote workers are more    productive, satisfied, and engaged than their office-bound    colleagues. Recent surveys of 8,000 workers by     McKinseys Global Institute and nearly 900 independent    workers by     Future Workplace and Field Nation find that those workers,    freed from the constraints of office life, report higher levels    of satisfaction and greater productivity. These results arent    surprising since remote work eliminates the wasted time of    commuting, the stress of constant exposure to office politics,    and the death of the workday by a thousand paper cuts of    interruptions and meetings. Yet somehow, despite evidence of    the many benefits of independent flexible work, our    office-based, five-days-a-week, time-in-the-cube approach to    work still persists at many companies.  <\/p>\n<p>    Why is that? Managers and human resource executives at    traditional office-based firms respond to this question with    narratives and anecdotes about trust, collaboration, and    team-building, but offer nothing in the way of evidence  even    from their own companies  to support their stories. The    evidence that does exist suggests that trust    and effective teams are built    primarily through interpersonal behavior and communication, not    constant proximity from working in the same office space.  <\/p>\n<p>    At least one reason to maintain an office and require employees    to work in it is that most managers enjoy working at a company    in which employees are managed by time and place. After all,    its pretty easy to see who is at their desk between 9 and 5.    Its much harder to develop, measure, and evaluate the specific    value and results that each employee produces. Managers will    have to work a lot harder under a system that focuses on    tracking performance, instead of time in an office chair.  <\/p>\n<p>    There is also a middle ground emerging between office-based and    remote work. New    studies show that workers who seek the structure of an    office-based environment and the camaraderie of colleagues are    much happier in co-working spaces than either a traditional    office or working at home. Co-working options offer workers the    best of both worlds  the control, autonomy, and scheduling    flexibility of remote work combined with optional access to the    structure and community of an office, if and when the worker    wants it. For companies, co-working spaces turn commercial real    estate into a variable expense item available at a lower cost.  <\/p>\n<p>    The rewards are great for companies that prioritize performance    over attendance in the office: more productive, efficient, and    satisfied workers, management focused on results and    deliverables instead of face time, a healthier corporate    culture based more explicitly on merit, and lower,    more variable real estate and facility costs.  <\/p>\n<p>    Labor is the most expensive and valuable resource at most    firms. Managing this resource by time and place is a crude,    empirically unproven, inefficient, and costly approach. The    biggest lessons that companies can learn from the gig economy    are to separate work from the office, and to measure employees    based on what they produce, deliver and solve, not the hours    they spend in the office. Put simply, companies need to stop    measuring what doesnt matter, and start measuring what does.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read more from the original source: <\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/hbr.org\/2017\/03\/will-the-gig-economy-make-the-office-obsolete\" title=\"Will the Gig Economy Make the Office Obsolete? - Harvard Business Review\">Will the Gig Economy Make the Office Obsolete? - Harvard Business Review<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> The gig economy, where independent consultants, contractors, and freelancers create portfolios of work in lieu of one full-time job, is transforming the way we work by disconnecting work from an office. In the traditional jobs economy, employers often require employee attendance in the office five days a week, eight hours a day.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/resource-based-economy\/will-the-gig-economy-make-the-office-obsolete-harvard-business-review\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187734],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-183909","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-resource-based-economy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183909"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=183909"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183909\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=183909"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=183909"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=183909"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}