Just as in our civil societies, work environments and workspaces are undergoing extraordinary transformations linked to a whole range of social, environmental, economic, and cultural factors.
The first difficulty lies in putting things into perspective, particularly in terms of time. The immediacy of information and the need for results, as well as ephemeral and superficial contacts, are further conditioning working environments and relationships.
While long timeframes no longer exist in our modern, hyper-connected societies, corporate reality - with rare exceptions - is generally calculated in terms of five-year plans, the notion of a decade having become obsolete, even vulgar. But here again, the notion of time diverges from one sector to another: while top management analyses results quarter by quarter in most cases, some sectors, including real estate, must plan 8-10 years ahead: this initial paradox generates frustration at best, and major stumbling blocks at worst.
Notions of sustainable development in the workplace come up against user comfort, technical or legal requirements: what choice should be made? Purists and dogmatists will reply that to ask the question is to answer it. In practice, however, this is not at all the case…
The flexibility demanded by workers in terms of both activities and workspaces often doesn’t fit in with corporate logic. The fact that we can’t decently calculate the efficiency and effectiveness of one approach, or another adds to the complexity of the dialogue.
In an increasingly polarized world, the search for dialogue and compromise is no longer part of our vocabulary or our actions. And yet, it is the search for a subtle balance between diverse interests that often guarantees calm and the continuity of approaches, relationships, and spaces.
It is interesting to note that the “union minimum” in terms of communication, information gathering, analysis and weighting is tending to disappear, even to be overshadowed by totally disproportionate and disconnected equals. A common refrain is: “We don’t have the time…”. And why not?
• Taking the time for reflection and dialogue is the key to a successful project.
• Involve people in the process, rather than ordering them to do things.
• Look for the answer where the knowledge lies, rather than asking the boss out of ego.
• Speak as partners rather than suppliers or subcontractors.
These points seem to come straight out of a management textbook, but it’s practice and common sense that show the way. Switzerland lives, almost by essence, on the quality of its brains and intellectual skills. We can only applaud this. The problem lies more in the ability to bring this knowledge and these ideas to bear over the long term, whereas companies work to the rhythm of seconds or minutes.
Dialogue isn’t always easy in business, but it’s the least bad way of moving things forward in a calm manner for all concerned. Why deprive yourself?
Good thoughts, happy weeks and see you soon.