I agree it was ridiculous, but why would the woman validate the question by giving the most obviously abhorrent response? That just made the question no longer ridiculous, because she answered in the affirmative.
In other words, "can a mother murder her toddler?" is only a ridiculous question if everyone in the room agrees on the obvious answer. This time, not everyone did... somehow.
To hear almost anyone tell it, racial preferences in university admissions are dead. But this pervasive sense of finality belies a curious silence in the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions. The Court never expressly overrules the line of precedent that has allowed universities to discriminate for the last...
We’re now finding out the damaging consequences of the mandated return to office. And it’s not a pretty picture. A trio of compelling reports—the Greenhouse Candidate Experience report, the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED), and Unispace’s Returning for Good report—collectively paint a stark picture of this brewing storm.
Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. And almost a third (29%) of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. In other words, employers knew the mandates would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.
Meanwhile, a staggering 76% of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work schedules, according to the Greenhouse report. Moreover, employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22% more likely to consider other options if flexibility comes to an end.
In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.
People were more open to returning to the office if it was out of choice
Flexible work policies have emerged as the ultimate edge in talent acquisition and retention. The Greenhouse, SHED, and Unispace reports, when viewed together, provide compelling evidence to back this assertion.
Greenhouse finds that 42% of candidates would outright reject roles that lack flexibility. In turn, the SHED survey affirms that employees who work from home a few days a week greatly treasure the arrangement.
The Greenhouse report has ranked employees’ priorities as:
Increased compensation (48%)
Greater job security (34%)
Career advancement opportunities (32%)
Better flexible work policies (28%)
A more positive company culture (27%)
In other words, excluding career-centric factors such as pay, security, and promotion, flexible work ranks first in employees’ priorities.
Interestingly, Unispace throws another factor into the mix: choice. According to its report, overall, the top feelings employees revealed they felt toward the office were happy (31%), motivated (30%), and excited (27%). However, all three of these feelings decrease for those with mandated office returns (27%, 26%, and 22%, respectively). In other words, staff members were more open to returning to the office if it was out of choice, rather than forced.
Real-life cases are mirroring findings
Recently, I was contacted by a regional insurance company with a workforce of around 2,000 employees. The company enforced a return-to-office policy, causing waves of unrest. It soon became evident that its attrition rates were climbing steadily. In line with the Greenhouse report’s findings, most employees would actively seek a new job if flexible work policies were retracted. The underrepresented groups were even more prone to leave, making the situation more daunting.
At that point, the company called me to help as a hybrid work expert who the New York Times has called “the office whisperer.” We worked on adapting the return-to-office plan, switching it from a top-down mandate to a team-driven approach, and focusing on welcoming staff to the office for the sake of collaboration and mentoring. As a result, the company’s attrition rates dropped and the feelings of employees toward the office improved, in line with what the Unispace report suggests.
In another case, a large financial services company began noticing employee turnover despite offering competitive salaries and growth opportunities. Upon running an internal survey, managers realized that aside from better compensation and career advancement opportunities, employees were seeking better flexible work policies. This aligned with the Greenhouse and SHED findings, which ranked flexible work policies as a crucial factor influencing job changes. After consulting with me, they adjusted their policies to be more competitive in offering flexibility.
A late-stage SaaS startup decided to embrace this wave of change. The company worked with me to introduce flexible work policies, and the result was almost immediate: Managers noticed a sharp decrease in employee turnover and an uptick in job applications. Their story echoes the collective message from all three reports: Companies must adapt to flexible work policies or risk being outcompeted by other employers.
Inside an employee’s head
As we navigate these shifting landscapes of work, we cannot ignore the human elements at play. Like unseen puppeteers, cognitive biases subtly shape our decisions and perceptions. In the context of flexibility and retention, two cognitive biases come into sharp focus: the status quo bias and anchoring bias.
Imagine a thriving tech startup, successfully operating in a hybrid model during the pandemic. As the world normalized, leadership decided to return to pre-pandemic, in-person work arrangements. However, they faced resistance and an unexpected swell of turnover.
This situation illustrates the potent influence of the status quo bias. This bias, deeply entrenched in our human psyche, inclines us toward maintaining current states or resisting change. Employees, having tasted the fruits of flexible work, felt averse to relinquishing these newfound freedoms.
Consider a large financial institution that enforced a full return to office after the pandemic. Many employees, initially attracted by the brand and pay scale, felt disgruntled. The crux of the problem lies in the anchoring bias, which leads us to heavily rely on the first piece of information offered (the anchor) when making decisions.
When initially joining the company, the employees were primarily concerned with compensation and job security. Once within the fold, the pandemic caused them to shift their focus to work-life balance and flexibility, as confirmed by both the Greenhouse and SHED reports. Unfortunately, the rigid return-to-office policy made these new anchors seem less attainable, resulting in dissatisfaction and an increased propensity to leave.
As we steer our ships through these tumultuous waters, understanding cognitive biases can help illuminate our path. Recognizing and accounting for the status quo and anchoring biases can enable us to create a workplace that not only attracts but also retains its employees in the new age of flexibility. After all, success in the world of business is as much about understanding people as it is about numbers and strategy.
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]
I was going to remark that I wonder what kind of person could make use of this thing, but then I remembered that this is the Internet and I could find thousands of such people with just a little effort.
It seems like it would help further prevent censorship, given how each instance of the Fediverse is run by people who can unilaterally decide what their users see. I'm beginning to feel like federation is but a half-step toward a solution.
Pro-lifers hate women and want to control their bodies. Pro-choicers hate babies and care about their own convenience more than the lives of children....
I don't think you really got my point. If you truly, honestly believed that doing something resulted in the death of a child, of course you'd want to prevent anyone from doing it. We already have a law against murder, and surely you wouldn't say "then they just shouldn't murder people, but don't try to impose their beliefs on me!"
The point is that, from the perspective that fetuses are children, restricting abortion is the most logical and consistent approach. This is unavoidable, and you can't change their minds if you don't address this. The way to sway a pro-lifer, then, is to demonstrate that a fetus doesn't have personhood.
If the pro-choice movement focused on rhetoric like that more, I think it would have much more success. Of course, that's only if the pro-life people are receptive to having their minds changed.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned of an “authoritarian expansion of power” by the Supreme Court after it released several controversial opinions in it’s last week of the…
Think about things from the point of view of someone who has never used Reddit or the fediverse, but you've heard about them both from recent news articles and want to see what they are about....
The problem is that nobody (or at least very few people of actual influence) are legitimately saying that trans people shouldn't get to exist. I have yet to see any politician, for example, express such a belief.
As we start to see more users join, it's inevitable to see trolls (especially low-effort trolls) making more of an appearance and trying to be controversial and noticed....
I wonder if people are going to abuse downvotes and reports. The downvote is not a disagreement button, and reporting just because you find a comment distasteful is not what it should be for.
I am of the belief that banning users or deleting posts, even inflammatory ones, harms free speech and hinders open communication. If you feel a user is "harassing" you (insofar as that's even possible, given you can freely ignore their comments), attempting to have the user banned just pushes the community toward becoming an echo clamber. I say this because people are very, very bad at distinguishing harassment from mere heated disagreement in the first place.
You make some very good points that I hadn't really thought of, honestly. It seems like I didn't consider the full implications of my position. I still like to tend toward leaving things up, but I agree with you now that that probably has to have its limits somewhere.
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]
Look a look at these clowns running the diving subreddit ( kbin.social )
https://www.reddit.com/r/diving/comments/155r24i/state_of_the_subreddit_update/...
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]
The Peculiar Silence in the Students for Fair Admissions Decision [FULL TEXT] ( quillette.com )
To hear almost anyone tell it, racial preferences in university admissions are dead. But this pervasive sense of finality belies a curious silence in the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions. The Court never expressly overrules the line of precedent that has allowed universities to discriminate for the last...
We're now finding out the damaging results of the mandated return to the office–and it's worse than we thought ( fortune.com )
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]
DoorDash fired an employee for trying to organize a union, NLRB alleges ( www.theverge.com )
Office 365 - Exchange online outage today
Good news, everyone!! Microsoft outage this morning in the UK. The tickets are streaming in…
What do people here think about Nostr? ( kbin.social )
It seems like it would help further prevent censorship, given how each instance of the Fediverse is run by people who can unilaterally decide what their users see. I'm beginning to feel like federation is but a half-step toward a solution.
No subject in American politics exhibits our reliance on strawman more than the abortion debate. ( kbin.social )
Pro-lifers hate women and want to control their bodies. Pro-choicers hate babies and care about their own convenience more than the lives of children....
Hi kbinners! Fuck spez ( media.kbin.social )
Ocasio-Cortez warns of ‘dangerous authoritarian expansion of power’ in Supreme Court ( thehill.com )
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned of an “authoritarian expansion of power” by the Supreme Court after it released several controversial opinions in it’s last week of the…
Fediverse won't replace Reddit as long as Lemmy is the main platform being promoted ( kbin.social )
Think about things from the point of view of someone who has never used Reddit or the fediverse, but you've heard about them both from recent news articles and want to see what they are about....
Reminder: reddit may be dead, but trolls are not. ( kbin.social )
As we start to see more users join, it's inevitable to see trolls (especially low-effort trolls) making more of an appearance and trying to be controversial and noticed....