For many publishers, Omicron has obliterated plans to return to a pre-pandemic normal. It is also forcing a reimagining of the role of middle management and the workday as we once knew it.

By William Dunkerley

"Workin' 9 to 5" is a phrase from the 1980 hit song “9 to 5” sung by Dolly Parton. Now more than 40 years later the tune might well be "Workin' Home Sweet Home," i.e, performing our editorial duties from home. But in either case, we're talking about a contentious issue.

These days the issue is not the way we work, but where we work: in the office or at home.

The Evolving Concept of Work

The Omicron variant has thrust that issue back into the forefront. Many publishers had been setting dates for resuming mandatory time at the office -- not necessarily full-time, but at least part-time. Now, however, a cresting Omicron wave may give some editorial managers pause.

Some back-to-the-office plans are now in doubt.

That pause is also a good time to revisit the controversial question of whether work at home should become a regular work arrangement.

Anne Helen Peterson, coauthor of Out of Office: The Big Problem and Bigger Promise of Working from Home, says that "9 to 5 is a relic" of a bygone era. She adds, "There's nothing that says that work has to happen from 9 to 5."

The Evolving Role of Management

Perhaps she's overlooking top managers who might think otherwise. That's another contentious issue in itself. Some managers have doubts about the productivity of home workers. They also may feel a loss of control. What's the answer?

Forbes published an article titled "The Real Reasons Why Companies Don't Want You to Work Remotely." Here's our interpretation of the points it makes:

--When a manager sees you working, she intuits that you are being productive. The fact that you may be busy texting friends escapes her. She is comfortable seeing the illusion of work.

--Managing in person meets some managers' need for a sense of power. Deep down they may realize they are no longer really needed to exercise power in that way. They object to work from home because they are running scared.

--With staff working from home, a manager faces the dilemma of unused real estate, empty offices. He will either have to risk continuing to operate with overhead lacking a good justification or be burdened by the process of downsizing.

--Managing a remote staff requires a skill that many managers lack. For them, an in-office staff is familiar and easily managed. Even a hybrid approach presents a new complication.

(Amazon sells a book that looks at the question from a different angle. It's titled I'm Not Technically Working from Home Anymore, I'm Living at Work. But when you look inside, there are only blank pages with room for notes!)

Some managers just don't wish to adapt to work at home. Bloomberg has news for them. Its December 12 article contends, "The Five-Day Office Week Isn’t Coming Back. WFH Is Here to Stay."

The Pitfalls of In-Person Work

That's something the authors of Out of Office would likely endorse. They point out that office work is full of distractions that actually reduce productivity. In response many workers have been taking work home in order to get it done. Their book cites this example:

Before the pandemic, a friend used to reserve between 9:00 and 10:00 PM -- after she'd put her kids to bed, while her husband watched television beside her -- for what she called "actually getting my work done." Technically, she worked pretty standard hours, arriving at the office at 9:00 AM and leaving around 5:00 PM to pick up her oldest from day care. But those hours were almost chock-full of meetings, some more essential than others. The only time she could do careful work, concentrated work, was at home during those extra two hours every night.

Putting staffers in that kind of position could be a recipe for burnout. That might be one reason that so many people are actively looking for work-at-home jobs to rid themselves of the office grind.

The 2021 “War on Talent”

A recent Adweek article put a name to that result, calling it "talent attrition." Based on interviews, it reported in its December 21 issue that "a flagging sense of morale and a competitive labor market has led to a widespread exodus and reshuffling of talent. The great resignation rocked industries across every sphere and media proved no exception."

The article went on to say, "This brain drain forced publishers to shelve initiatives they had planned for the year and deflated the momentum they were building on the business side. Managers struggled to keep reporters motivated to chase stories, while sales teams floundered in the absence of their usual camaraderie."

"There was a real war on talent this year," BDG [Bustle Digital Group] president and CRO Jason Wagenheim told Adweek. "We had to focus on initiatives like career advancement and company culture to ensure we remained one of the best places to work in digital media."

Before the spread of Omicron, there was much speculation regarding further rebounds in ad spending. Forbes reported on a projected increase of 13 percent for 2022. That would generally have been good for editorial operations.

More advertising usually leads to greater a need for content and often translates into more generous editorial budgets. That's not something we can count on, though. Like so much in this Covid era, assumptions made today may suddenly become inappropriate tomorrow due to emergent circumstances. Flexible and adaptive planning is the approach we strongly commend for editorial managers.

William Dunkerley is principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, www.publishinghelp.com.

Add your comment.