In addition, more options for flex hours and four-day work weeks emerged. Creativity around the time-and-place work paradigm, especially for knowledge workers, blossomed; and team members began to rely on these flexible options to better integrate their work and life schedules. Flexible work options moved from a nice-to-have perk to a must-have benefit that team members now relied upon.

In the last few months, however, headlines have been peppered with news of companies rescinding their work-from-home options and putting in place return-to-office (RTO) mandates. Some business leaders are even mandating five-days-a-week in the office beginning January 2025.

When explaining the mandates, the reasons these RTO promoters give vary, including the need for in-person work to improve collaboration, innovation, productivity, learning, relationships, and company culture. But this RTO news is not sitting well with companies鈥� talent. For example, when Amazon recently made an RTO announcement, a of 2,585 Amazon employees found that 73% of employees are considering looking for another job because of the new in-office work policy.

RTO mandates risk turnover, which will likely negatively impact work culture and productivity, which in turn can ultimately lead to greater turnover.

The tax & accounting profession is already facing capacity and talent pipeline challenges. The number of college graduates heading into the profession has been declining, and only 鈥渙ne in nine college business-related bachelor鈥檚 graduates鈥� are choosing an accounting degree, according to the (NPAG). Given the number of career options open to accounting graduates, tax & accounting firm leaders need to be mindful of what will appeal to talent at all levels.

Flexibility in work is crucial, survey says

In 2024, ConvergenceCoaching added an element to its biennial that queried accounting firm leaders on their remote and flex work offerings and also surveyed public accounting team members to hear their thoughts on these benefits.

Responding team members confirmed the importance of having a choice in where they work, according to the ATAWW Survey. In fact, 83% of respondents said that remote work flexibility is very important to them; and 55% said they would likely seek a new job if they lost the ability to work remotely.

Clearly, those firms maintaining hybrid, remote, and flex-time benefits will have a competitive advantage in acquiring and retaining top talent in this tight talent market. Not surprisingly, in the five years since the pandemic, workers have developed new habits and schedules that enable them to achieve greater work-life integration; 93% of respondents said they feel work-life integration has improved with remote work options.

Today, accounting firm leaders who embrace a one-size-fits-one approach to remote and flex work arrangements could more positively influence firm culture, productivity, and morale by empowering their talent to choose the best and most effective work environment for their day. Instead of RTO mandates, leaders could implement adjustments to incorporate remote management techniques.

The need to outline clear expectations

It is important to clarify what is expected of each employee, because when working at different times or in disbursed locations, the lack of face time can leave some leaders wondering about team member productivity. To ensure productivity levels stay high, leaders need to clearly communicate:

• • • expected team member output, deliverables, or results
    • specific due dates
    • clear response time expectations to email, Teams messages, and voicemails
    • participation guidelines for remote team meetings (cameras are on, unmuted and speaking up, chatting, facilitating portions of meetings)
    • protocols for communicating during normal, agreed-upon work hours as well as changes from the expected normal hours
    • ways to communicate capacity and move past barriers in completing work
    • supervisor/assignee communication expectations
    • expectations for skill development and elevation into higher level work
    • guidelines for keeping calendars current and specific

Establishing clarity around these expectations, leaders can then track and benchmark performance against them instead of measuring less-reliable metrics like time-entered, face time, or keystrokes.

An RTO mandate may feel like a simple way to solve people-management challenges, but it鈥檚 likely to have significant unintended consequences on engagement, productivity, motivation, and ultimately, talent retention. Instead, leaders should develop new management strategies that include clearer expectations that can empower employees to produce their very best in both their work lives and their personal lives no matter where or when they are working.

You can find out more about聽the talent challenges facing tax & accounting firms听丑别谤别.

Two recent studies offered interesting 鈥� and seemingly contrasting 鈥� views. While 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 recent聽2024 Law Firm Office Attendance Policies Report found that many legal professionals are enthusiastically embracing the return to office, another study by the University of Pittsburgh 鈥� a meta-analysis of other organizations鈥� surveys and reports 鈥� reported negative effects to the point where it recommended that employers may wish to re-evaluate their return-to-office policies.

What accounts for this seeming disparity? Some of the variance between the two reports鈥� findings may be due to differences between the work environments of law firms and S&P 500 companies. With most law firms being partnerships, partners are not only owners and managers but also function as employees at the same time, perhaps making them more attuned to frontline working conditions than are managers in other industries. Also, with the increased attention being paid in recent years to lawyer well-being, including mental health and preventing burnout, law firm leaders may be making a concerted effort to create office attendance policies that align with balancing employees鈥� desires.

At the same time, both reports point to some key elements that may influence whether new office attendance policies succeed for any organization. The differences may lie in how and why return-to-office and attendance policies are implemented.

Where differences may lie

The 成人VR视频 Institute report surveyed legal professionals in law firms and found 鈥渟tartling enthusiasm鈥� for their respective firms鈥� office attendance policies. An overwhelming 86% were either satisfied or at least neutral, leaving barely one-in-ten legal professionals who said they were dissatisfied with their working arrangements. Much of this is due to the surprising amount of flexibility in office attendance that many law firms have offered their lawyers. On the other hand, the study by the University of Pittsburgh鈥檚 Katz Graduate School of Business examined S&P 500 companies and found a significant decline in employee satisfaction in companies that instituted return-to-office mandates.

Motives, intentions & goals

A common thread between both reports鈥� findings is that an organization鈥檚 intentions, motivations and goals in pursuing return-to-office policies may be an important factor.

The University of Pittsburgh report contends that many managers are using return-to-office mandates to regain control over employees, and they blame employees as a scapegoat for bad business or stock performance. While the 成人VR视频 Institute report does not go that far, it does say that firms were hoping to see higher productivity and increased collaboration. Both reports conclude that anticipated results 鈥� such as improved performance, productivity, and collaboration 鈥� generally have not materialized as a result of returning to an office building.

However, there is obviously a major difference between hoping to see improved performance and blaming returning employees for poor business performance. While law firms may not have seen the hoped-for gains, their positive intentions for greater collaboration, as compared with using return-to-office mandates as a blame-shifting excuse, may have contributed to the high overall satisfaction level among legal professionals.

Importance of flexibility vs. One-size-fits-all

The flexibility or rigidity of return-to-office policies also may play a key role. The 成人VR视频 Institute report found legal professionals who were dissatisfied were most commonly in firms with less-flexible policies. Further, they were in the office more than the average respondent, which may also be a result of less flexible policies.

Overall, 64% of legal professionals said their firm鈥檚 overall policy is flexible, allowing them to largely choose which days they are in the office. This likely contributes to the high satisfaction levels as well. (One other factor is important to note: Many lawyers and paralegals rely on mentorship and collaboration for their work and for career development, both of which likely benefit from physical proximity with senior lawyers, practice group leaders, and partners.)

The University of Pittsburgh report similarly found that several studies of corporations tended to find both improved performance and increased employee satisfaction in cases in which the company offered greater flexibility in employees鈥� work-from-home and hybrid workplace arrangements.

In that sense, both reports are consistent in their findings, suggesting a correlation between policy flexibility and employee satisfaction. Indeed, this emphasizes the point that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for return-to-office policies, work schedules, and hybrid working arrangements. Rather, employers have a multitude of options and considerations in implementing these policies, including:

• • • number of in-office days required or suggested for each week
    • alignment of in-office days (mandating or encouraging a common in-office day or days, such as having all team members in-office every Monday)
    • organizational hierarchy, or having office attendance policies that differ among departments, teams, or practices rather than be organization-wide, depending on needs
    • enforcement or incentives 鈥� what incentives can be provided to encourage employees to follow the policy? What are the consequences of an employee not adhering to the policy?
    • Communication of goals, with the idea that the more that employees understand the reasoning and expectations for office attendance, the more likely that they may view the policies positively, or at least with a neutral stance

Given these options, it may be beneficial for leaders to have at least a general directional sense of employee sentiment. Employee surveys may not be practical in every case, however, and organization leaders may be understandably reluctant to allow employee preferences to drive office attendance policies. And even with high levels of employee satisfaction overall, the stricter the office attendance policies the more likely those policies will increase turnover. For example, in the 成人VR视频 Institute survey, although only a small percentage of legal professionals say they are dissatisfied with their firm鈥檚 attendance policy, a large proportion of them were unsure if they would be at their firm in six months.

Interestingly, the University of Pittsburgh report cited surveys in which a large number of managers admit making decisions based on intuition instead of fact. They said that with a more comprehensive understanding of workplace data, they would have pursued significantly different strategies for their return-to-office requirements.

Conclusion

In an industry notorious for long hours and high levels of stress, law firms may be using return-to-office strategies as an opportunity to structure office attendance policies in ways that maintain or even improve employee satisfaction.

Despite the seeming difference in results, the 成人VR视频 Institute and University of Pittsburgh reports actually represent two sides of the same coin. Both found flexibility and intentions play significant roles in determining employee satisfaction as more businesses adopt new return-to-office and attendance policies. Law firms may simply be more successful than other businesses in getting it right.

Still, the results for law firms so far are highly encouraging 鈥� and could in some cases be emulated in other industries 鈥� and suggest that many legal professionals are satisfied with them.

Leonard Lee, of Perfectense, contributed to this blog post.

---

You can download a copy of the recent 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 2024 Law Firm Office Attendance Policies Report here.

At the heart of the report is the surprising discovery that legal professionals have not only adapted to but have enthusiastically embraced new hybrid office attendance policies. This pivot marks a stark contrast to the initial apprehension surrounding many firms鈥� planned return-to-office mandates, which many feared would rigidly tether employees to traditional in-office schedules. Instead, a flexible hybrid approach has emerged as the preferred model, striking a delicate balance between office presence and remote work.

The survey, conducted between December 2023 and January 2024, gathered responses from 350 legal professionals working at large US law firms. Almost all (97%) of the respondents were full-time workers, and almost three-quarters (73%) were lawyers of various classes.The survey reveals a broad consensus among legal professionals in favor of these flexible arrangements. A notable majority (57%) expressed outright satisfaction with these new policies, while a minority (29%) said they feel at least neutral about the policies. The report also highlights that those respondents registering dissatisfaction with the policies are most commonly among those legal professionals subjected to less-flexible policies, suggesting a direct correlation between policy flexibility and employee satisfaction.

Despite the warm reception to hybrid work, the anticipated productivity and collaboration benefits of increased office attendance remain elusive. The report challenges the notion that mere physical presence in the office leads to enhanced productivity and collaboration, as the findings indicate mixed outcomes, with no definitive evidence that returning to the office has significantly boosted productivity levels. Further, the objective of fostering better collaboration and mentorship through more frequent in-office interactions seems to have fallen short as well, especially as senior lawyers often benefit from greater work-from-home flexibility.

These nuanced findings extend to the impact of office attendance policies on firm performance and employee retention. High levels of satisfaction with these policies generally correlate with a positive outlook on job retention; however, a minority of legal professionals express dissatisfaction, primarily those from firms with stringent attendance policies. This discontent could potentially influence their decision to remain with their firm, underscoring the critical balance firms must strike in implementing these policies.

Those respondents registering dissatisfaction with the policies are most commonly among those legal professionals subjected to less-flexible policies, suggesting a direct correlation between policy flexibility and employee satisfaction.

The report also critiques the one-size-fits-all approach to office attendance, advocating for a more tailored strategy that considers the diverse needs and preferences within the legal profession and among individual law firms as well.

As law firms evolve in their response to the shifting paradigms of the legal industry, the 2024 Law Firm Office Attendance Policies Report serves as a pivotal reference point, capturing a moment in time when the legal sector stands at the crossroads of tradition and innovation, while navigating through the complexities of a rapidly changing work environment.

The insights garnered from this comprehensive survey not only reflect the current state of law firm office attendance but also illuminate the path forward, highlighting the importance of adaptability, understanding, and strategic flexibility in shaping the future of legal work.

You can download a complimentary copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s 鈥�2024 Law Firm Office Attendance Policies Report鈥� by filling out the form below:

But how can government agencies best cultivate such workforces and strategies to best address and mitigate environmental, logistical, and cyber threats?

The best resiliency defense is a good offense

Over the past three years, unexpected health, economic, and environmental challenges have highlighted vulnerabilities that can disrupt government agencies. Resiliency strategy focuses on how well your organization can maintain its operations in a worst-case scenario. Indeed, should involve having plans, processes, and systems in place to operate even when conditions are severely compromised, ensuring continued provision of essential government services, says Suzanne Spaulding, Sr. Advisor for Homeland Security at CSIS.

The are staggering, with 15 designated disasters in 2022 alone causing more than $1 billion in losses each. Given the escalating pace of climate change, it鈥檚 likely that resilience efforts and funding are not keeping pace with the increasing frequency and severity of these disasters, according to The Federal Policy Action Plan to Accelerate Local Climate Resilience, from (C2ES).

In fact, resiliency planning and infrastructure supports collaborative efforts with advisory groups and external partners and can aid in securing and distributing emergency funds. It is estimated that for every $1 invested in pre-disaster resilience planning, there鈥檚 a potential $6 in savings on recovery costs, according to the C2ES plan.

Resiliency planning in the federal government

The C2ES plan outlines the federal government鈥檚 recommended role in climate resilience as a chief coordinator and resource provider. This involves effectively administering government resources, providing leadership, and supporting local-level resilience actions and capacity-building. Essentially, the federal government鈥檚 primary function is to act as a hub for sharing high-quality information and a source for funding, the plan notes.

As future decades are likely to see increased climate change-related natural events, we are witnessing communities and nations shift to greater renewable energy sources and increased electricity usage, according to the CSIS report. These changes pose increased risks to energy systems.

The Biden Administration shifting away from carbon pollution in energy development and moving toward a net-zero emissions economy. Since 2021, more than 20 federal agencies have published climate plans, the CSIS report states.

Given workforce turnover due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, it is crucial to provide agency training to ensure the federal workforce is adequately prepared to anticipate and respond to the ongoing impacts of climate change.

Increased funding and centralization of federal efforts are important priorities in the years to come. In 2019, FEMA received grant applications totaling $3.6 billion dollars for their Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, which focuses on updating critical infrastructure, notes the C2ES action plan. However, in that funding cycle, only $500 million was available, enough to fund just one out of every seven grant applications.

Clearly, federal agencies lack centralized coordination on this front. To address this problem, the U.S. Congress introduced the , during the 2021-2022 Congressional session. The proposed Act aimed to establish a Chief Resiliency Officer role in the Executive Branch, create a government-wide effort to build resilience to climate-change vulnerabilities, and form working groups to drive the strategy and its implementation. Despite broad bipartisan support, the bills did not progress to a vote.

Resiliency planning at the state and local levels

Resiliency planning implementation varies widely across the United States. However, 27 of the 50 states have some form of resiliency infrastructure in place. State and local government agencies are familiar with local needs and have more direct access to land and energy infrastructure, states the C2ES plan. Although federal agency platforms offer valuable information sharing, they could enhance collaboration by enabling secure information exchange among users, added the CSIS report.

According to a report from the (NCSL), those states with some form of resiliency infrastructure in place are using resilience tools, such as: a state office of resiliency, a state resiliency officer, or a commission or task force. Sixteen states have appointed a chief resiliency officer role to streamline planning across agencies and provide oversight, the NCSL states, adding that these resiliency efforts are more prevalent in coastal states, with many of them specifically addressing climate change and in particular, flooding.

One area that could benefit from improvement at the state and local level is the standardization of resiliency measures for energy systems, according to the CSIS report. Current data on electrical reliability provided by utilities does not account for systemic differences in capacity, criticality, or vulnerability. While organizations may be hesitant to share information that exposes vulnerabilities, the true value of resiliency planning is intangible until a disaster occurs.

Ensuring equity and workforce resiliency

Low-income and marginalized communities are faced with a disproportionate threat from climate change. These communities are more likely to bear the brunt of climate-related impacts due to their locations in vulnerable areas, which often have less access to FEMA assistance, pose challenges for evacuation, or are prone to greater damage. Effective resiliency planning and resource distribution can increase equity in crisis response and preparedness, notes the CSIS report.

Agencies engaged in resiliency planning bear a direct responsibility to foster equity within their teams. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts enhance resiliency because a diverse workforce is better equipped to anticipate risks and is less susceptible to groupthink, the CSIS report states. To promote equity in government workplaces, it鈥檚 crucial to revamp hiring processes, address bias or perceived inequities, and identify and rectify biases and systemic barriers that exclude certain groups.

The global COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of adaptability in adverse situations and stress management. Workforces that are diverse, equitable, and provide psychological safety are better prepared to innovate and navigate the climatic changes we will all face in the future.

There is consensus among the public that regulation is not only necessary but also highly desirable, according to a on trust in AI, in which 71% of participants shared this view. In the U.S., Axios conducted a study in which 56% of respondents said they over self-imposed regulations by the tech industry.

The slow progress of AI regulation

The federal government, primarily led by the legislative and administrative branches, has opened the conversation on the regulation of AI but has yet to formalize any concrete policies. U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced the , which focuses on the importance of establishing , fostering collaboration between tech industry leaders, and creating insight forums to educate members of Congress about emerging AI technology. Further, decisions are pending regarding whether new agency creation is merited or if existing agencies can independently oversee AI within their respective sectors.

All this stands in sharp contrast to the European Union鈥檚 proactive regulatory approach, in which its AI Act has already pre-emptively banned high-risk applications, leading to the prohibition of some public tools like OpenAI鈥檚 ChatGPT due to security concerns.

The federal government, primarily led by the legislative and administrative branches, has opened the conversation on the regulation of AI but has yet to formalize any concrete policies.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission 鈥� jointly with the U.S. Department of Justice, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 鈥� asserting their authority to regulate AI, to better ensure fairness, equality, and justice in AI systems.

Indeed, unregulated AI poses various risks, such as the spread of , extensive personal data collection, and employment disruption. These potential harms fall under and encompass issues like unlawful discrimination in housing and employment, improper data collection practices, and harmful outcomes that endanger consumers.

State and local government approaches

As the federal government lags behind, , primarily those along the coasts, have either enacted or proposed legislation related to algorithmic decision-making as of this past summer. The most comprehensive legislation thus far is NYC 144, which governs in New York City. Across these states, the prevailing trend is focused on , which can allow individuals to opt out of profiling, request the deletion of collected data, or at a bare minimum, be notified when algorithmic decision-making and data collection are used.

Two states in particular, , have taken a broader approach, focusing on the overall impact of algorithmic tools in decision-making rather than the specific tools. California emphasizes the disclosure of algorithmic tool usage to enhance transparency, while Pennsylvania requires the sharing of systemic information about these tools, including impact assessments that evaluate their functionality and effects on people.

Tech industry perspectives

Predictably, technology advances more swiftly than do government regulations. Meanwhile, leaders from have introduced their own to enhance AI safety. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI (parent company of ChatGPT), advocates for a for AI tools that exceed a crucial threshold of capabilities. However, some critics argue that this approach may limit competition.

Microsoft President Brad Smith describes AI as a co-pilot with the potential to change the world but emphasizes the need for human control and regulatory safeguards to act as emergency safety measures. Industry leaders share the perspective that speed in implementation is critical. While some state leaders have imposed temporary halts , congressional leaders appear inclined to support innovation without unnecessary hindrance, a move which the tech industry understandably supports.

The ability to explain and understand AI tools, as well as their transparency, remains an ongoing dilemma. A 2023 survey from Axios indicates that 62% of respondents are concerned about the future impacts of artificial intelligence.

Microsoft President Brad Smith describes AI as a co-pilot with the potential to change the world but emphasizes the need for human control and regulatory safeguards to act as emergency safety measures.

Because algorithms often function as , producing useful outputs without clear explanations for their conclusions, it becomes crucial that government agencies which utilize AI must have a core set of principles that . Unexplainable algorithmic decision-making tools run the risk of generating dangerous, unethical, or non-transparent outcomes. Further, a Goldman Sachs鈥� report predicts significant economic disruptions due to algorithmic tools, in both the U.S. and Europe.

Yet, as the 成人VR视频鈥� recent Future of Professionals survey report points out, there are two contrasting perspectives emerging for our future: one of opportunity and one dystopian. In the former, AI leaders are pointing to the growth opportunities and cost savings which will emerge from the development of new tools, services, and the identification of new markets. AI will likely shift more work in-house, modify pricing structures, and move tasks to lesser credentialed individuals. Indeed, experts point to the need for a fundamental understanding and new skill sets for the workplace due to the rapid operationalization of AI.

Almost 90% of professionals surveyed in the 成人VR视频 report said they expect some basic level of AI training for professionals over the next five years. It will be critical to upskill and reskill existing professionals in how to use these innovative tools and how to continually understand and correct our unconscious biases.

Widespread implementation of the technology will rely heavily on low-code or no-code templates, and it is vital that these templates are designed with agency mission, ethical principles, and safeguards against discrimination in mind. Third-party evaluations and performance standards also will have to be measured in order to prevent unintended harm from these tools.

“Any organization has two manifestations: the formal organization with its rules, procedures, and organizational diagrams, and ‘what actually happens’,” said Dr. Roger Miles, faculty lead of the banking industry body U.K. Finance’s conduct leaders’ academy and a researcher and consultant on behavioral risk.

“Discovering the latter exposes problems and risks but senior managers often have a determinist view and wrongly assume that what their rules say is what everyone does,” Miles noted.

Hybrid working聽hiding problems

Hybrid working became normal practice at many firms as the COVID-19 pandemic wound down. Staff liked being spared a commute and enjoyed the greater flexibility to accommodate childcare and other needs. And many firms saw the potential to reduce the amount of expensive office space that they rent.

Hybrid working remains popular with employees. With people no longer in the same place at the same time, managers depend on video-conferencing platforms such as Zoom, Webex and Microsoft Teams; however, without the necessary management skills, problems can go unnoticed or unchecked.

“In online meetings, you lack important clues 鈥� body language, other visual signs, conversational nuances, significant silences 鈥� that would tell people in the same room someone’s holding back their true opinion or has some other difficulty,” Miles said.

“It’s easier to query something in person, especially when you sense that somebody else may support you,鈥� he added. 鈥淰irtual working can mean more doubts are suppressed, which is the opposite of the ‘speak up’ culture鈥� that the United Kingdom鈥檚聽聽(FCA) expects.

SVB & operational risk

Failure to challenge matters online has been suggested as a factor in the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) because underlying causes included unhedged risks from rising interest rates, a narrow client base, and a sudden pullout of deposits. However, some flagged SVB’s enthusiastic adoption of remote working, which most staff enjoyed. A聽聽mentioned the difficulty of challenging decisions like interest rate risk over Zoom.

SVB’s 2023聽, released in February, acknowledged that its work-from-home (WFH) arrangements created operational risk. The report said the negative effects of WFH that SVB could experience included systems access problems, cybersecurity or information breaches, and work-life balance problems reducing productivity or causing significant business operations disruptions.

From the C-suite to call centers, hybrid working risk-reduction is not helped by the way many managers in finance are developed, and the focus often is on performing a role, not how to oversee others. Research by the , found that despite the prevalence of managing via online channels, there was scant training for it.

Lack of training, online meetings where most attendees keep their camera and mic off unless called to contribute, and a subconscious ‘familiarity breeds contempt’ attitude creates problems. Sensitive online meetings can be overheard as people take calls in coffee shops, while walking dogs, or on a train. Hybrid working may also contribute to the use of unauthorized messaging services for work.

Further, hybrid working affects staff development and meeting FCA training and competence requirements, as in-person instruction entails getting the instructor and trainee into the office on the same day. Anecdotally, one problem is that upper-middle tier managers at some firms can be absent even on core office days. The 聽regarding remote or hybrid arrangements require firms to take into account the possible detrimental impact on training, and there are clear shortcomings.

“We all learn in unconscious ways, and seeing your manager operate on a day-to-day basis in person will undoubtedly influence how we learn at work,” said Anthony Painter, director of policy at CMI. “A survey of managers late last year asked about onboarding new employees, and 7-in-10 told us they found onboarding new team members and building relationships at work harder in a hybrid work setting.”

Pushback from firms

The Lloyd’s insurance market is among those pushing back against three days in work patterns and wants Monday restored as an office day, ideally aiming for full-time attendance. Some investment banks always viewed hybrid working as an unloved post-lockdown necessity that got staff back in the office at least part-time without triggering mass resignations in a tight labor market. With economic conditions harder, firms’ attitudes started stiffening last autumn.

Staff resistance to full-time attendance may thwart firms. Several banks have repeatedly told employees to be in the office full-time since late 2020, but logic would dictate that you do not have to keep ordering people to do something if they are already not doing it. A聽聽found that over one-third of staff at London law firms, and nearly half in North America, had ignored calls for greater office attendance with firms reluctantly conceding on the issue.

A call back to the office can weed out those abusing the concept of being managed remotely 鈥� sometimes referred to as ZEUS workers, meaning those who put in zero effort unless supervised. One company recently paid staff a lump sum towards the travel costs of returning full-time; later, non-attendees’ excuses included spending the money on clothes and disliking commuting approximately five miles. Another non-attendee who asked whether the firm would install聽air-conditioning first had to be reminded the office had always had it.

Reluctance to return to the office can indicate serious diversity and cultural problems as well, as it may really be about avoiding unpleasant people. Last month, a recruitment company reported that workers over 55 years old were the most likely to experience deliberate exclusion by colleagues. Women over 45 were twice as likely to face sexist behavior than younger ones and one-third had been bullied.

“If your colleagues are deterred from coming to the office because of a hostile environment, you have bigger problems than the balance between in-person or remote working,” Painter said. “Such a culture is fundamentally corrosive and will impact the well-being and performance of your staff. It will also exclude many talented people, whether over 45 or under 45.”

Other workers may find the office less attractive now聽that fewer people are there.聽In March, reported that 52% of managers found WFH meant workplaces, especially at larger firms, were lonelier; and 47% found work more stressful than in pre-pandemic times.

As businesses become more human-centered, approaches to collaboration in this time of mixed approaches to work 鈥� in-person, remote, or hybrid 鈥� are an ongoing question. While some organizations are strongly encouraging a specific number of days in the officer per week, others are still fully remote or leaving it up to the individual needs.

For example, members of the 成人VR视频 Equity, Diversity & Inclusion advisory board recently shared how they are navigating hybrid work, returning to the office desires, and balancing preferences in both in-person and remote work amid very diverse work styles and backgrounds among employees.

With the reality that the legal and tax & accounting industries operate on personal connections, which, generally speaking, are forged more efficiently in-person, two members of the advisory board outlined their firms鈥� current guidelines to hybrid work. First, they strongly encourage all lawyers to show up in the office on specific days of the week with flexibility in choosing a third day in the office. This has allowed people to maintain their desired flexibility with structure without diluting personal connections and cultural norms.

Second, they allow employees to work where they need to be, based on a descending order of priorities: i) working where the employee needs to in order to meet the client鈥檚 needs; ii) working where the business and the team want; and finally, iii) working where the employee wants. The benefit of this approach has helped employees pivot from self-first paradigm during the pandemic to more business need-led decision-making.

As legal and tax & accounting employers work through the right balance between working in the office and elsewhere, it has become evident that remote work does not necessarily mean less engagement, according to a three-year study of knowledge workers by , Product Management Director at , and research partner , a professor of management at McCombs School of Business at the University of Texas at Austin. More specifically, insights from their research revealed that remote meetings appear to be becoming a lot more natural and effective, mostly because meeting length shrunk by 25% and had fewer attendees between 2020 and 2022, with the proportion of remote meetings that are one-on-one increasing from 17% to 42%. Also, remote meetings seem to be mirroring in-person interactions a whole lot more due to their spontaneity and size, the study found.

Getting the most out of meetings

While the approach to work ultimately will vary depending on the needs of the organization, there are key lessons to be learned from the remote work experience over the last three years. Tolliver and Brodsky shared how their clients using these insights, including:

• • • Being intentional about meeting culture 鈥� Tactics, such as setting agendas for meetings, create meeting norms among team members and ensure there are opportunities for people to speak up. These have become important elements of productive meeting culture.
    • Analyzing technology fit 鈥� Be mindful about collaboration and make sure there is forethought in what technology is being used and for what task. Sometimes certain tasks are better done via e-mail rather than spending time in a meeting.
    • Building trust 鈥� For a manager, building trust with your employees, especially among those who work remotely is critical. First and foremost, make work and promotion decisions based on work outcomes and impact, not presence in the office.
    • Experimenting & using data 鈥� One of the best tactics organizations can utilize is constantly experimenting in order to try new approaches, whether it’s with employees or clients. During this process, organizations should collect data, adjust, iterate, and experiment again. The right solution won鈥檛 occur on the first try, of course, but by using data-driven qualitative and quantitative analysis, organizations can keep working to improve.
    • Being mindful about how time in the office is used 鈥� This is particularly important for collaborative reasons. Having employees commute an hour each way, just to sit in the office and perform the exact same tasks that they would do at home is not ideal. Managers should schedule most team meetings on in-office days. For lawyers, this may be harder to control given the nature of client demands, but it is worth making the effort.

As the future of work shakes out, balancing between in-office work and remote work will compel organizations to lean intentionality toward collaboration and more inclusive meetings to better gain an edge in increasing employee satisfaction (and therefore, productivity and retention) going forward.

The policies vary by company, of course, employees be back in the office at least four days per week; while are mandating a set number of days but allowing employees to choose which days they come to the office.

This all begs the question, why? Many studies and surveys have reported that productivity did not decline during an extended period of remote working, but rather went up. And employees were grateful for the ability to have more control over their schedule and work location, allowing them to craft a better work/life balance for themselves.

Leaders requiring a return-to-office mandate cite the need to reconnect teams, foster greater collaboration, and create equity for those who cannot work from home. Many of these concerns have been voiced by leaders of tax & accounting firms as well.

Accountants return to the office

So, are tax & accounting firm leaders implementing similar policies? To answer that, let鈥檚 look at a recently published report, . This comprehensive report examined the adoption of flexible work practices in 216 accounting firms across the country and reported significant increases in adoption and expansion of access to remote and flex work programs.

Of the 216 accounting firms that participated in the , 97% allowed their talent to choose where they work, while 94% offer flexibility in when people are working. The report notes that with more firms leaning into outsourcing, offshoring, and fractional staffing resources, it is increasingly important to learn to work asynchronously across multiple time zones. The survey also shows that surveyed firms are leveraging gig-based workers (30%), domestic outsourcing teams (30%), and overseas offshoring providers (35%).

With an increasingly tight talent pipeline, the report illustrates that leaders need to get innovative on staffing their teams. In fact, the 2022 ATAWW Survey found that 鈥�81% [of survey respondents] hired at least one remote team member they had not employed before,鈥� which essentially means that firms are hiring new staff in their remote geography. It鈥檚 remarkable to note that this result was up from 38% in 2020.

Tax & accounting firm leaders are also eliminating outdated mandates to work Saturdays during peak seasons. In fact, 73% of responding firms now make Saturday hours optional, giving their talent the ability to choose when they will complete the extra workload required during busy seasons, the survey found.

Outside of peak periods, firms are implementing creative ways to give their talent a collective break. Almost half (47%) of survey respondents close their office on Fridays, while another 11% remain open and rotate which employees can take the day off. And just 1% of the respondents said they provide Fridays off all year round.

With the discussion of the four-day work week increasing 鈥� for example, to encourage employers to offer a four-day work week 鈥� many firms are offering these kinds of benefits to be more attractive to talent.

Extending more benefits

Unlimited paid time off (PTO) is another benefit that is being discussed across the tax & accounting industry. 鈥淯nlimited PTO programs emphasize a culture of flexibility built on personal responsibility and mutual trust,鈥� the survey notes, adding that accounting firms that offer this benefit rose from 11% in 2018 to nearly one-fifth of participants (19%) in 2022.

In fact, these benefits are being extended to all levels of client-facing staff as well as administrative and operations personnel. This level of flexibility 鈥渨orks for partners to administration 鈥� it works for everyone,鈥� says Renee Moelders, ATAWW Survey co-author and Partner at ConvergenceCoaching. The 2022 ATAWW Survey found that 83% of participants offer these flex options to some or all of their operations and administrative talent as well. With cloud access, paperless documents, and revised workflows, it makes sense that all team members would be offered the option to work remotely or in a hybrid fashion.

Based on the ATAWW Survey data, it鈥檚 clear that there is a growing commitment in tax & accounting firms to extend more flexibility to their talent. And those firms embracing more flexibility will have a competitive edge in hiring and retaining top talent, while those holding onto more traditional models of work are at risk of facing greater staffing challenges going forward, warns Moelders.

Of course, there are still many challenges around greater flexibility that tax & accounting firm leaders still have to address, such as how they will ensure team collaboration, how they will train and teach remote team members, and how can they keep a remote team on track.

The answers to these challenges will take innovation and intentionality to implement and execute, but it can be done. When the pandemic hit, tax & accounting firm leaders were forced to find new solutions to keep their practices running while ensuring safety for team members and clients. Now, it is time to reignite that creativity and look at remote and flex work as a long-term solution.

Firm leaders shouldn鈥檛 let the headlines about return-to-office mandates lull them into thinking their talent will willingly accept such policies. Tax & accounting practices are well-equipped technologically to offer firm talent these flexible options, and leaders need to expand their thinking on flex and remote work so they can make their firm a destination workplace that will attract top talent.

Many organizations recognize the importance of screening employees for potential risks before they are hired in order to shield an organization from significant losses due to errors in judgment, negligence, fraud, and misuse of company property. In our modern age of information, however, this initial background screening or even occasional screenings are just snapshots in time. It is essential for any organization to continually monitor employee profiles and to “know the knowable” so that timely and appropriate interventions may be taken if required.

Who is responsible for KYE in an organization?

In many organizations, the responsibility for KYE generally falls somewhere among the HR, risk management, and business continuity functions.

If you think about your individual business, who in your company is responsible for ensuring that none of the employees who normally enter customers’ homes have been recently charged with a violent offense? Or, who is responsible for making sure that the organization鈥檚 CEO or CFO who may be going through some financial difficulty doesn鈥檛 suddenly become compromised by an extortion attempt? These and many other examples, if realized, carry significant reputational, operational, and financial risks to the company or organization.

Clearly, forward-thinking and responsible organizations would be wise to create policies and procedures that prepare for a worst-case scenario while still hoping for the best possible outcome.

Preventing risk falls on risk management

A company鈥檚 risk management function is designed to shield it from dangers of all kinds, thus this team is best positioned within the company to oversee risk management related to employees. Putting thoughtful investments into prevention measures allows these teams to become even more effective and proactive in the prevention of potential disasters.

By actively monitoring and assessing employee risks, for example, risk management teams ensure that any changes in an employee鈥檚 behavior or personal information are identified quickly so that appropriate action can be taken.

Today, corporations have a responsibility to their fellow employees, their customers, the communities in which they operate, and all their stakeholders to be proactive and know about obvious red flags associated with their workers. Traditionally this has been a very difficult task to manage, as there is really no service that can help you know everything you should be aware of. However, companies that seek to remain competitive in the market must make this effort.

To that end, continuous evaluation of employees for real-time arrests, signs of financial distress, sanctions violations, and other indicators of risks have the tangible benefit of reducing business exposure to a workplace tragedy, policy violations, regulatory and compliance risks, fines, and major reputational damage caused by not intervening prior to a preventable incident.

Indeed, more than agree that their company management does not take adequate steps to keep them safe at work. This perception leads to decreased productivity, increased employee turnover, and weaker responses to employee incidents. And these insider threats can include such damaging actions as employee workplace violence, theft, fraud, cyber-intrusions, and corrupt business practices.

Further, according to the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE), a typical insider fraud case lasts about 12 months, and 85% of displayed at least one behavioral red flag prior to their eventual detection.

Company management needs to be proactive to effectively mitigate these risks. By taking preventive measures before a situation spirals out of control, business leaders can mitigate or at least lower their company’s exposure to these risks.

Maintaining industry compliance

Risk management and compliance professionals are in agreement that most regulated industries have some duty to make sure that their employees meet strict standards set by regulators that include meeting licensing requirements, ensuring customer safety, and limiting access to sensitive information. As such, part of a risk manager’s job is to ensure that all employees meet industry standards and regulations.

Just as robust monitoring solutions and policies need to be a priority in a Know Your Customer program in order to mitigate risks posed by customers or clients, a solid continuous evaluation in a similarly robust KYE program is necessary to mitigate the “knowable” risks posed by the company鈥檚 own employees.

Ongoing employee evaluation comes with challenges of its own, of course 鈥� such as concerns around the Fair Credit Reporting Act and state employment privacy laws 鈥� however, proactive management can overcome these challenges with alert-based monitoring and the right policies in place.

Overall, strategic investment into a quality KYE program will allow an organization and its management to be proactive, protect their employees and customers, and mitigate potential disasters.

Regardless of your focus, effective change management is critical to a successful digital transformation. So, how can we demystify change management for various members of the legal profession and provide a framework for those in disparate roles to communicate effectively?

One way might be to examine a case study. Let鈥檚 imagine a need where a law firm or legal software company desired to build a matter management system for a client whose legal issues are truly unique, thus requiring either significant modifications to an off-the-shelf software product or a customized software build.

As we embark on this journey, we will identify three main phases of our case study: Plan, Build and Deploy. We will also define the key change management aspects of each phase as we create a customized matter management platform.

Plan

Nadine Ezzie: Ken, from your viewpoint on the technical side of the shop, what are the key change management points to be addressed during the planning phase of a legal tech build out?

Kenneth Jones: The initial phase of a project is one where business requirements are defined. Documenting these in a manner both technologists and legal professionals can comprehend is critical. Defining other essential elements of a project 鈥� such as the need to migrate over legacy data, reporting, data interfaces, and necessary workflow 鈥� is also vital at this stage.

Defining project scope, deliverables, timing (often in stages), and cost are elements of this project phase as well. Specifically as it relates to matter management, defining data points needed in areas such as legal venue, plaintiff information and allegations, the tracking of matter milestones and key documents, and company specific facilities and hierarchies required for reporting are all part of the mix.

In your legal experience, Nadine, what should happen next?

Nadine Ezzie: I find this period to be the most critical when ensuring a successful legal tech transformation or adoption. Attorneys, by our nature, are trained to mitigate risk where possible. Persuading us to change our ways is not easy, but also not impossible. Communication and transparency is key.

Communicating early not only about the scope of the project but also about how it ties into the overall business objectives of the firm or organization can foster greater adoption. I also advise tapping a legal champion of the project. This is someone from the legal team, usually mid- to senior-level, who is open to digital transformation, understands the value it can bring, and will help champion the project to other team members. This last part is critical as these are the users who will actually use the system and enter the relevant data (such as matters, report creation, processing tasks, etc.)

Having your ultimate end-users not only understand the value proposition of the project but also appreciate how it will improve their ability to perform their roles can decrease any sentiments of threat or reluctance to change. Remember, the less surprises, the better.

Defining end goals for a matter management project 鈥� for example, lowering the overall cost of a litigation by x% per year, or reducing the average settlement by y% 鈥� also are excellent approaches for defining the parameters of a large-scale project.

Build

Nadine Ezzie: Now, it鈥檚 time to build the solution 鈥� so, we鈥檙e in your wheelhouse, Ken. What change management considerations should be kept in mind during this phase?

Kenneth Jones: One vital element in this phase is transforming business requirements into a data model with functional specifications. One best practice during the build phase is to construct the new system, in short-cycle build phases often known as chewable bites, and offer frequent visibility to end-users in order to solicit incremental feedback.

Sharing system mockups is a great way to ask users if all the data points associated with a matter are being tracked or if reports created by the system will meet the needs of the client. In our example, this might mean sharing the matter-entry process flow and field list with users prior to moving on to reporting needs to ensure that the required litigation data points are integrated into the system.

And speaking of reporting, reviewing what is created with end-users for purposes like projecting legal costs for future years, filing insurance claims, or assisting with outside counsel evaluation and review processes in an iterative manner makes good sense, especially as reports are built. Indeed, it鈥檚 important to review not only the report content, but also the format (PDF, Excel, etc.) and the ability to export or transfer data to other systems. It鈥檚 also critical to get this feedback from those in various job functions, such as legal professionals, attorneys, or executives rather than just the technologists.

In the technical area, change management in the build phase also should include code repositories, reviewing code changes, and a formal test plan to better implement system changes.

Deploy

Nadine Ezzie: This is the phase we鈥檝e all been waiting for. I find that deployment in phases works best for increased adoption. I work with teams to identify which part of their existing process will be modified first, and then set a time frame for training and questions. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

End-users need to know they have an advocate and support system during this time of deployment that can relate to this time of change. It鈥檚 also important to tailor messages to different workers through the process chain. For example, those in legal operations who enter and maintain data would get a different message than those in leadership roles who probably never log into a system but use data reports to project litigation impact and cost.

Well-designed and user-friendly support materials help tremendously as well. Make it so these materials are easily accessible so end-users can refer to them easily once live training support has ended.

Kenneth Jones: Clearly, a significant element of deployment is training end-users. They need to know how to address client questions about matters, efficient data update strategies, generating litigation reports, etc. On the tech front, using issue-tracking with tagging to categorize development needs and writing technical documentation are strong practices to follow.

Conclusion

Change management is an intricate process with many flavors 鈥� those coordinated by attorneys, legal professionals, or core technology professionals will likely show those differences.

The better those in the legal profession do, the more likely the result of our case study will be improved outcomes and lower costs that鈥檚 powered by the new technology which was successfully adopted, used, and even appreciated.