Oh yeah, you’re on for our most self-indulgent rant to date! This time we’re ranting about the joys of working from home, but contemplating why it took a pandemic to make it the norm.

This is a most personal take for us, as for a long time we detested commuting with a passion.

Now freed from its shackles, we’re here to consider why it should be enforced for those who can work remotely, all whilst having a dig at the men in suits. Edgy!

WTF or WFH? The Argument For and Against

Let’s get the benefits of working from home here in a list right away. WFH provides:

• A greatly improved work-life balance
• Total removal of commuting stressors
• Greater independence
• Money savings
• The environmental benefits
• Sustainability benefits
• A customisable office
• A greater appreciation for your employer
• Greater productivity

To note, the last point has been proven over and over again. Working from home makes employees more productive. Behold:

“77% of those who work remotely at least a few times per month show increased productivity, with 30% doing more work in less time and 24% doing more work in the same period of time according to a survey by ConnectSolutions.”

Apollo Technical, April 2022

No, your staff members won’t just sit around drinking beer and watching Netflix. Why? Three reasons:

1. No work would get done
2. That’d be obvious by the end of the first week
3. And then you’d get a warning (or be sacked)

Plus, there’s this thing called professional that usually drives most employees. You know, the reason they were hired (and have never been fired) is due to their skill set. Traits they’re not suddenly just going to abandon as they’re sitting in their study, rather than your office 30 miles away.

However, for a balanced argument, some professionals do contest that WFH is a bad thing.

Such as Yahoo!’s CEO Marissa Mayer. And she was backed up by Dan Ingram, VP of marketing at Enkata. He said:

“People who come into the office just get more done. In one data set, office based workers were 50% more productive than people at home. Maybe they’re learning from their peers. Or maybe they just have a better idea of what is expected of them. Bottom line is more output per work hour.”

Dan Ingram, VP of marketing at Enkata, 2013

Now, to point out, that was from 2013. Way before we had the en masse test of lockdown-based working from home, which immediately proved Ingram wrong. Most businesses reported productivity shooting up.

Including the business we were working at in 2020, who then boasted about the WFH productivity increases. But then immediately regressed and, as our former colleague confirms, still insists everyone comes into the office.

Others of that ilk suggest there’s too much distraction, and possibility for procrastination, in a homeworking setting.

What they completely ignore, every single time, when they state that argument is the capacity for distraction in an office setting. Stuff like:

• Impromptu, and always pointless, meetings for no reason
• Loud employees doing loud stuff
• Employees stuffing their face with crisps next to other employees
• Loud departments doing loud department stuff (i.e. sales and their relentless phone calls)
• All sorts of random happenings (i.e. the lift breaking down, fire alarms, idle chitchat around the water cooler)

And, you know, just the whole arriving into working after a horrible commute and then being expected to get on with work like it hasn’t drained your very soul dry.

The reality is, office work often isn’t very conducive of work. No matter how many traditionalists try to drone on about it being otherwise.

Especially if you’re a copywriter or content writer. That’s us! And in the past, being forced to try and work with a cacophony of office life going on was futile.

The debate will rage on. Some businesses will refuse to budge. Others will adapt. Here’s our conclusion on the matter.

Should You Stay Or Should You Go!?

The quotes above kind of typify the whole debate in one go. There are those who appreciate what WFH offers to employees and their business. Whereas the counterargument suggests it’s a bad thing.

But we think the point here is about choice.

Forcing employees into the office day in, day out as you think they won’t work effectively is the action of a control freak.

What’s the point of hiring people if you don’t trust them?

Everyone works at their best in a different way. Some people want to work from home. Others may well want to go into the office. Let them decide—offer total freedom of choice.

It’s also interesting to note the article by Dan Ingram for Wired (Yahoo’s Mayer is Right: Work-From-Home Employees Are Less Efficient) was partner content.

You know, a sponsored post with an agenda.

Back in 2013, when the feature was published, new technology was emerging (Skype, internet advances etc.) to the point it was apparent a lot of employees no longer really needed to be in the office.

Now, a lot of businesses were obviously going to get worried about that.

So, why not spread your anti-remote working message with some data (that was immediately proved wrong in 2020) to delay the issue and keep everyone in the office?

You know, like with a sponsored post!

Whilst we’re on that subject, don’t forget to check out Doolally Doreen’s Demented Data Processing! Doolally Doreen is THE BEST data processing business in the world! You want that data processed?! She’s you’re gal!

Doolally Doreen’s Demented Data Processing [Sponsored Post]

And we turned to Doolally Doreen’s Demented Data Processing for the definitive answer on whether WFH is the right choice for employers, and employees, of the world. This is what she found!

“We tried pulling the data but the computer broke and so I have no idea.”

Doolally Doreen, CEO of Doolally Doreen’s Demented Data Processing

Amazing! Thanks for that, Doolally Doreen, a distinguished professional as always.

Anyway, we do note the anti-WFH brigade do want to go out of their way to shoot the idea down and block remote working. We’ve noticed this lot tend to be overprivileged, white, right-wing blokes over the age of 50 with a chip on their, respective, shoulders.

That’s fair enough. If it’s their business, they can ban remote working.

However, in so doing they’re going to block themselves off from a major amount of talent. Employees now expect the freedom of choice.

If they’re not going to allow working from home, a huge proportion of employees are going to clear off to a business that does allow it.

We sure did. And we won’t bring our skill set (*duuuh huh huh, we so smart*) to a business unless they do offer it.

A business refusing remote working is in danger of seriously falling behind the times. A perilous decision for any organisation to willingly take.

Dinosaurs can bleat about it being for “snowflakes” all they want, but by raging against the concept they merely display they’re hopelessly out of touch.

Offer freedom of choice. It’s that simple. And revel in the long-term benefits.