Smart working in Switzerland: Nine insights after one year of the pandemic

The outplacement service provider von Rundstedt conducted a large study on the topic of Smart Working in Switzerland between December 2020 and February 2021 under the direction of Prof. Dr. Andrea Martone (Director Research & Studies at von Rundstedt). A large survey was also launched in the process.

Pandemic as a Driver for Modern Forms of Work?

The study and survey aim to examine the experiences and effects of home office work on work culture and company structures and processes one year after the first lockdown with compulsory home office was declared for many employees. Is the forced home office move in Switzerland finally leading to the new work culture long predicted by Work 4.0 and Future Work? Are we on the way to Smart Working, or are we simply teleworking from home? Are Swiss companies taking advantage of this opportunity to shift in principle and permanently to a work culture with greater flexibility and autonomy in the choice of work space, time and means? Will the pandemic shock ultimately lead to a cultural change in Swiss companies? What are the first experiences with Smart Working? Does Smart Working really lead to more productivity, efficiency, quality and better results? Are Swiss companies aware that this requires more than home offices and teleworking?

Smart Working: 9 Insights

534 HR managers and executives from companies in various industries, language regions and company sizes took part in the survey. Nine findings can be derived from the responses:

1. Mainly telecommuting, but hardly any smart working: The vast majority of the companies surveyed have not introduced smart working, but teleworking. They are still working within the same structures, processes and methods and have merely moved the same work processes that previously took place in the office to a remote location (the home office). In the eyes of the study authors, this means that many companies are missing out on a major opportunity.
2. Covid as an involuntary accelerator of Smart Working: For 77.4% of the companies, Covid was the main reason for home office practice and smart working. Most companies would not have voluntarily switched to remote working until today. Smart Working is therefore currently not a choice, but pure necessity. This also explains why modern forms of work are not yet really anchored in the company and culture.
3. Too much remote working: Experts see the optimal and healthy remote time at 2 days per week. Based on Covid, over 60% of all companies in Switzerland have exceeded this mark. 46% of the companies even sent their employees 60-100% to the home office, and this last year, before the home office obligation. This is not a healthy level and is alarming, according to the study. Possible consequences are demotivation, coordination problems, declining relationship quality and endangered work-life balance.
4. Positive impact on efficiency and quality: It is often feared that the more difficult leadership and coordination and opportunistic behavior of employees will have a negative impact on productivity and efficiency. The study finds that the opposite is the case: over 75% see no drop in efficiency. Some 37% even see a clear increase in productivity. A similar picture can be seen with quality. Some 80% see no drop in quality, and 22% even believe they are seeing an increase in quality.
5. Negative impact on team and employee motivation: Not surprisingly, team and employee motivation seem to suffer under Smart Working. While the quality of collaboration remains unchanged. However, around one-third of companies report a decrease in collaboration and teamwork. 69% of companies see a deterioration in social relationships among employees. And almost half of all companies observe that employee identification with the company has deteriorated. Against this background, companies would do well to launch targeted measures to engage and retain key personnel.
6. Younger with higher readiness; older with more skills: It is not surprising that younger employees are quicker and more willing to switch to smart working and accept more flexibility and autonomy. They are also more accustomed to virtual communication than older employees. However, if we look at the ability for Smart Working, it would actually be the older employees who, with their experience in working life and in organizations, have the better prerequisites than the younger ones. Smart Working requires a good understanding of the organizational context. This should not be underestimated when introducing Smart Working to younger employees. Readiness and ability diverge here.
7. Smart working will remain in the future: Although smart working and remote working were introduced more or less involuntarily by Covid in most companies, only 6% of the companies believe that this new form of working will disappear again. The overwhelming majority of 69% believe that Smart Working will continue to exist as a work model and culture in the long term, but that it will decline slightly in its intensity and characteristics, i.e. settle into a healthy middle ground. A further 15% even believe that this changed form of working will continue to increase, spread and intensify.
8. Too little support for employees: This change in work culture and collaboration model is not easy for many employees. However, in most companies, employer support is primarily limited to the provision of technological resources and infrastructure (laptop, printer, licenses). Most employers are very reluctant to provide further financial support (e.g. office infrastructure and working environment in the home office). Too little is also done in terms of personal and individual support (training 40%, coaching 19%). Only when it comes to making working hours more flexible do a majority of employers (76%) lend a hand.
9. Opinions in management differ widely: There is definitely disagreement in management about whether Smart Working is successful, desirable, sustainable and meaningful. Various parameters point to dissent. For example, half of the managers think that Smart Working will lead to more confusion and lack of clarity in the work environment, while the other half do not see it that way. Probably the same half of the managers see Smart Working as leading to a loss of control over employees, while the other half do not see it that way. The study also locates an exciting finding in the self-doubt of managers: over half of managers believe that executives and managers have more trouble with the transition to Smart Working than employees. These figures indicate that a large proportion of managers feel they are in a dilemma.

Strategies for the future

The findings of the study have been compiled by von Rundstedt in a white paper. It also outlines strategies for the future. There is no doubt that the world of work will be different after the pandemic than it was before. That's why changes are needed at various levels: In leadership, in the measurement of productivity indicators, in corporate structures, in training, and in labor mobility. For example, leadership will have to shift more to the relationship level and focus less on processes. KPIs will be replaced by OKR (Objectives on Key Results) as measurement criteria. Corporate structures will have to become more flexible and be based on teams instead of hierarchies. This means more autonomy for employees, who will have to be trained differently. Personnel development will become more important and is likely to lead to increased demand for corresponding services.

Source: von Rundstedt