Cons. When you are going through this section, please know that you can adore something AND understand or acknowledge the flaws. Nothing is perfect, but as long as we keep an open mind and want to improve we can improve together.
In office enforcement. As of now, we are expected to go in office 2 days a week. A great compromise as I stated above. However, this only seems to apply to some teams and personnel. While I understand that some teams do benefit from full in office work, making all of us subject to the same scrutiny really is an issue for me. Senior leadership outside of 2 or 3 (that I consistently see) do not come into the office at all or the majority are fully remote. I almost always hear after an executive visit this threat to bring us back to full in office work since attendance is not satisfactory. The actual data on how they measure attendance or what is deemed as satisfactory has yet to be disclosed. Without knowing what team or who is at fault, it makes it seem that all of us are the problem. We cant improve, and we cant fix it. All it does is create tension and unease where it is least needed.
As far as I know, everyone that I have talked to both high and low, almost unanimously agrees that full in office work is disliked or unwanted. Im not sure who keeps this going or why. For me personally, I know this is a deal breaker so this threat to return to full in person work is even more unwelcome. I wholeheartedly disagree with the “rules for thee but not for me” and if they (C-suite / Upper management) want to truly enforce this, they themselves should be in office alongside everyone else.
Keeping with upper management. Ive noticed that while they try their best to listen to all feedback, they seem to listen more to one group and stay with one group. While I can not go into detail here, for our current goals and projects we need to take into consideration opinions of those that are working hand in hand with customers. Those that are on the front lines and that has to help these customers. Only having surface level meetings about a process that has clear flaws will not be sustainable or profitable in the long run.
Speaking of...meetings! I'm not going to lie. I like a good productive meeting. However, some of these can be an email or better yet a chat group. With the current work load, taking time out of the day to have an ‘update’ meeting, where the only update is that there are none, can add up and hurts our productivity. I personally have it made as my meetings are manageable, but wasting time on minuta at this stage is an issue for me especially as I continue move up here.
Lastly, work load. We are a small team. I love that! However, at the moment it seems that the majority of the work gets placed on mid tier employees and below. Those same people whose feedback would help steer us in the right direction, are also being asked to step up even more and take on other responsibilities without increase in pay or real recognition. I understand playing your part and wanting to do your best. However, I myself at times have been stretched so thin that things do fall through the cracks. I also see the workload take a toll on those above me. It's times like this that we need leadership to lead by example, take initiative and offer help or guidance that isn't influenced by few.
Over all the ‘cons’ are things that we can improve on over time. There is not a single systematic issue here that would be at the top of my list when recommending this place to someone. I do believe that leadership will address these issues and come to a compromise if they cant flat out fix them.
