Michel Font -<\/strong> Le teleworking<\/strong> was a fundamental trend, and there was a demand for it among employees. On the other hand, the technological tools were struggling to establish themselves. There was a profusion of solutions with which not everyone was familiar. The advantage of this crisis is that nowadays everyone knows how to use a computer. Zoom<\/a> or Teams<\/a> and even more \"exotic\" solutions<\/a>. Technological maturity has taken a real leap forward in the space of a year.<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> As always, the solution does not lie in excess. Those who once banned teleworking outright, and wanted to keep their staff in the office all the time, were wrong. The same managers who suddenly decreed \"we're giving up our offices, everyone is working from home\" are also wrong. The proof is that the few companies that have experimented radically in this area have gone backwards. Once the dust has settled, many companies are likely to increase the proportion traditionally devoted to teleworking, but will retain a high proportion of face-to-face meetings<\/strong>. To caricature, we could say that we will gain half a day or a day per employee at home. But the rest of the time, these employees will come to the office, they'll even ask for it. People need momentum<\/strong>So I think the balance will change. So I think that the balance will change, but companies that have made violent moves in one direction or another will backtrack over time.<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> Of course, teleworking can be more or less easy for different employees. Not everyone has an office at home to be alone in. management challenge<\/strong>. Let's not kid ourselves: many managers are absolutely incapable of managing remote teams, especially those who want to control everything. So we need to invest in training these managers, in the knowledge that some of them won't change, especially those who have spent 40 years managing teams by keeping people in front of them. The problem of trust between teams and managers, and how to create it differently, is a real challenge.<\/p>\n Nothing unexpected happens in a remote meeting<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> We need to separate the tele-robust\" subjects<\/strong>that can withstand the risks of distance, and everything that is \"tele-fragile<\/strong>. In the first category, there's routine business, everything that's fairly routine, fairly formal. The weekly team meeting, for a simple update, can easily be done remotely: employees are used to working together. On the other hand, the tele-fragile aspects include trust<\/strong>It's also about the long term, the strategic. What is also \"tele-fragile\", and not everyone has yet grasped this, is everything to do with innovation and informality. Nothing unexpected happens in a remote meeting. It's just what's on the agenda. Whereas before every face-to-face meeting, everyone goes for a coffee, for example, which gives rise to initial discussions in front of the machine. We don't reinvent ourselves very much if we're not all there face-to-face.<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> It's difficult to come up with a common rule for everyone, as it depends on the culture of each company and the personality of its managers. I know a managing director who, as soon as the lockdown was lifted, announced to all his employees: \" the holidays are over. We all know that teleworking involves more TV than work.<\/em> \". The message was clear: \" I don't trust you when you're not there<\/em> \". In other companies, on the contrary, it has created opportunities; some employees have revealed themselves in this organisational scheme. Very often, the problem concerns employees who don't have the right physical conditions for teleworking, or who are in cross-functional roles that require constant interaction, which is very complicated from a distance. There are so many different scenarios that I think the only real recommendation is to set up the most flexible system possible<\/strong>with a clearly defined framework.<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> Some of the best start-ups in the Next 40 have successfully tried this by, for example, setting one and a half days' teleworking per week for employees with less than five years' experience, and an extra day for those with more than five years' experience. It's very clever, because distance is a major handicap for young employees<\/strong>. To learn, there is of course training, but there is also the need to soak up everything you hear around you, to stay up a little later in the evening chatting to a senior person who can give you some advice. This is no longer possible at a distance. In a caricature, we could say that distance works for an experienced executive, with a house equipped with an office to isolate himself... The right solution is flexibility<\/strong>.<\/p>\n I have a hunch that we'll be travelling less often, but when we do, the level of experience and impact will be much higher.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Michel Font - <\/strong>The cursor will shift slightly, and they probably won't go out into the field as much as before, but I don't believe in breaking up<\/strong>. Sales staff will always have to be on the move if they want to generate contact with new customers, build trust and increase their portfolio. There's also the question of integrating new employees. At some point, someone who doesn't go out into the field to see what's going on won't understand the company, the sales outlets, the customers... So we may make different choices, you'll be less likely to leave on a whim<\/strong> for a two-day trip to Asia, but there will be momentum. From a personal point of view, I have a hunch that we'll be travelling less often, but when we do, the level of experience and impact will be much higher. We see it in the seminars we organise with senior executives: when people get together, they really have to feel that there's a point in having travelled. We won't be crossing the Atlantic for a meeting, but we'll be going away for a week to combine the meeting with visits to subsidiaries and customers.<\/p>\n Michel Font - <\/strong>This experience has reaffirmed the position of the office<\/strong> as central point for the flow of information, trust and confidence.<\/strong>and as a distinctive feature of the corporate culture<\/strong>. Businesses will be looking for different surfaces, perhaps smaller ones, with more meeting spaces. But I don't believe in Second Life-type initiatives. People want things to be simple and effective. If we need to see each other, we'll see each other, otherwise we'll call each other.<\/strong>. I don't believe in this kind of intermediary or avatar, although I could be wrong. Above all, employees are going to be looking for real added value in coming to the office. It will be more a question of access to creativity rooms, to technological tools that enable them to do what they can't do elsewhere, with specific uses.<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> That's what I've observed. Personally, I've been using this nomadic format for ten years now. And I've noticed that the experience of confinement has converted several of my close contacts to this way of life<\/strong> They have sold their Paris flat to move to the regions, and take a 'maid's room' for occasional trips. They have negotiated with their company to come back two days a week. I think this is going to become widespread. Previously, when someone attended a videoconference from a location other than the office, it raised questions. Now it's totally the norm...<\/p>\n Michel Font -<\/strong> Those who want to see this episode as a breakthrough are wrong: it will not be a revolution. On the contrary, intelligent managers will take advantage of what has happened to propose greater flexibility and adjustments. according to the pace and desires of each employee<\/strong>. They have a head start in retaining their employees, whereas companies that opt for all-teleworking or no-teleworking will lose out on the best talent.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"What will remain of this trend after the crisis? Should we expect employees to desert offices for good?<\/h3>\n
This experience may also have shown that not everyone is cut out for teleworking...<\/h3>\n
How can companies strike the right balance between teleworking and office life?<\/h3>\n
What advice would you give for good management of teleworking?<\/h3>\n
A flexible system, but a defined framework: what form might this take?<\/h3>\n
Will business travellers return to the field, or will they have to get used to the virtual world for the long term?<\/h3>\n
Virtual office\" solutions have emerged, in the spirit of Second Life. Does this mean that we can't do without an office, that the company, its coffee machine and its corridors need to be embodied, even virtually?<\/h3>\n
Do you think this experience has convinced many employees to move out of Paris? Will tomorrow's business trip be the home-work journey?<\/h3>\n
What impact might this have in terms of recruitment?<\/h3>\n