It was shocking, not to say anything else, what executive Tallis Gomes said about remote work a while back: “(…) it is impossible to build anything in this model. Don’t be held hostage by lazy people who want to laze around at home”. Unfortunately, thoughts like these reflect a major prejudice that some of the market still carries. For those who perform their activities in this way, it is common to hear jokes insinuating that we do nothing or that we are professional procrastinators. Anyone who thinks like that is mistaken, and I’ll prove to you why.
A first point to consider is how remote work is beneficial for people. Study conducted by the University of São Paulo and FIA Business School points out that 94% of professionals who perform their activities in this way say that their quality of life has improved. This happens because some obstacles are removed, such as the long hours of commuting from home to the company, a very cruel reality especially in companies located in big cities like São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. Balance and quality of life do not mean “procrastination,” but motivation.
Furthermore, working remotely also allows for more time with family, promoting greater autonomy to balance professional and personal lives. Therefore, working without physical fatigue and having more time to dedicate to personal projects, employees end up more motivated and willing to give their best at the company. As concluded by a study conducted by consultancy Right Management, after surveying 30 thousand people from 15 countries, motivated individuals produce 50% more.
This is also supported by companies, as a study conducted by EY showed that 74% of employers have also noticed increased efficiency in recent years. Going further, Brazil is one of the worldwide leaders in turnover rate, with data from the General Registry of Employees and Unemployed (CAGED) indicating a national rate of 56%. With the adoption of remote work, this number is likely to plummet, as a Robert Half survey shows that 80% of Brazilians seek a better balance between personal and professional life to feel happier in their careers.
The findings of the digital transformation report for Latin America indicate that companies embracing remote work see a 41% higher productivity increase compared to those that barely allow activities at home. This is because people tend to work more at home, benefiting the companies. This is supported by a study from the National Bureau of Economic Research in the United States, which confirmed that employees working from home end up working an average of 48 minutes more.
Another crucial point to be discussed is the issue of diversity and the increased job opportunities for people living far from major cities. When in-person work was the norm, a company in Sao Paulo, for instance, only had employees residing in the same city due to logistics. With remote work, individuals from distant regions have equal chances to work in major companies without needing to undergo an unplanned change of location.
With this, the exchange of ideas between people from different regions of Brazil increases, allowing access to distinct cultures that, in turn, contribute to making the corporate environment more inclusive. According to a McKinsey survey, ethnically, regionally, and culturally diverse teams have a 33% higher chance of achieving better results, precisely by increasing companies’ creativity and problem-solving capacity. Especially in technology, diverse teams bring more innovation and disruption.
Regarding organizational culture, which many claim is impossible to build in remote work, I also disagree. Impulso is the biggest example of this. We were born 14 years ago and have always been 100% remote. We have an extremely strong culture based on freedom with responsibility. It is possible, indeed, to build culture remotely as long as remote is culture.
Going against remote work is a step backward. Leaders like Tallis Gomes apply the model they believe is the best for their businesses, but this does not mean remote work does not function. It is more than proven to work. Look at almost 2 years of pandemic. We often tend to blame the ‘what’ and not the ‘how.’ The drop in productivity while the company was operating remotely also does not mean the model is bad. Meta itself shows us this.
Mark Zuckerberg, in September 2023, announced that Meta employees would have to say goodbye to home office to return to the office. What did he claim? Productivity problems, stating that 2024 would be the “Year of Efficiency.” Now, in January of this year, the executive goes public once again, this time to announce that the tech giant will likely make the largest wave of mass layoffs in its history. Nearly 4,000 employees will be cut. Almost 5% of its global workforce. And what is the justification given? “Poor performance.” In other words, the issue was not remote.
The problem usually lies in management. It is necessary to understand that different models require different management formats. The biggest mistake is trying to apply the same way of managing the team in person to the remote model. Routines, processes, flows, communication, and even tools have to be different. Impulso didn’t go from zero to over R$ 50 million in revenue despite remote work but because of strong management and culture provided precisely by remote work.
