Why isn't the C-suite listening to their workers?
Employees turn to the C-suite for leadership, but what they’re actually getting is deaf ears.
Be it disagreements over work arrangements, the best application of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and even what employees choose to wear to work, management and their workforce is clashing on some fundamental issues, and it could cost organizations their talent and trust.
When it comes to new technologies, employees’ thoughts on AI range from cautiously optimistic to downright fearful. And the C-suite is doing little to assuage those fears: 68% of the C-suite admit that their company has made AI-related decisions that are not in employees’ best interests, according to a new survey from software company UKG. Employers should work on being more transparent to get more buy-in from their teams, says Hugo Sarrazin, chief product and technology manager.
“It’s important to talk about ethical use of AI, where it’s being used and most importantly, to help employees know what that means,” Sarrazin says. “Make everybody interact with it and feel it to see the power of what it does and doesn’t do well.”
Read more for bridging the fear gap around AI: Are your company’s AI decisions good for employees? 68% of C-suite leaders aren’t sure
A big topic of frustration for employees are ever-changing work arrangements, and employers who refuse to listen to their workers regarding which work environments are best risk having a stressed-out staff. According to a new report by Gympass, 38% of workers who were in the office but preferred remote work — or vice-versa — were twice as likely to say they were struggling with their well-being, and twice as likely to be unhappy at their company than those who felt aligned with their work arrangements.
These “mismatched workers” reveal employers still have a lot of learning to do around workplace well-being, says Gympass’s CPO, Livia de Bastos Martini.
“It shows me that even though companies are still focusing more and more on well-being, they still don’t really get that the well-being journey is different for different people, and different people have different needs,” she says.
Read more on the danger of ‘mismatched workers’ at your hybrid office: Mismatched workers’ are derailing your hybrid work plans
Perhaps C-suite leaders should avoid weighing in on hybrid arrangements altogether, suggests Zach Dunn, co-founder of Robin, a hybrid work platform. When it comes to nailing down which days people are in-person, office managers and frontline managers — not the C-suite — should be responsible for designing the best schedule for individuals and teams.
“People want the freedom to develop a routine, and they want to be able to make revisions to that routine from time to time,” he says. “We’ve seen customers create working contracts or team working contracts, where a smaller division of a department or functional team decides [on the] routine to participate in and the type of work [that will be brought] into the office.”
Read more about creating an arrangement that works for employees: Why the C-suite should stay out of hybrid work scheduling
If in-person work is truly the end-goal for organizations, adding additional demands on what employees wear while they’re there could be the final straw, says Corey Andrew Powell, marketing content manager at the National Society of Leadership and Success, an honor society.
“You don’t have to have a suit and tie on to be competent, and a suit and tie doesn’t make a difference if employees are incompetent,” Powell says. “Just come in, do a good job, and I’ll thank you when it’s done. I don’t care if you’re wearing a muumuu — just do the work.”
Read more on the futility of demanding a dress code amid hybrid work: Bye bye, business casual: Office dress codes swap suits for sweats
