'Defeated' CEO's Finally Concede Hybrid Working Is Here to Stay (yahoo.com) 88
"After a year of cracking down with rigid return-to-office mandates, defeated CEOs are now finally accepting that hybrid working is here to stay," reports Fortune:
KPMG surveyed U.S. CEOs of companies turning over at least $500 million and found that just one-third expect a full return to the office in the next three years.
So it's official: Leaders who believe that office workers will be back at their desks five days a week in the near future are now in the small minority. It's a complete 360 on their stance last year, when 62% of CEOs surveyed predicted that working from home would end by 2026. At the time, 90% of CEOs even admitted that they were so steadfast on summoning staff back to their vertical towers that they were sweetening the pot with salary raises, promotions, and favorable assignments to those who showed face more.
But now, bosses are backtracking: Nearly half of CEOs have concluded that the future of work is hybrid — up from 34% last year. What's more, a sizable chunk of CEOs aren't just embracing working from home on Fridays, they're going one step further and ditching the workday altogether. KPMG found that a third of CEOs are exploring the feasibility of a four-day week at their firm...
Research has echoed that nearly half of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated, and 29% of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. It perhaps explains why, as KPMG's data shows, CEOs are now waking up to the fact that the future of work is probably the happy medium of hybrid... Lewis Maleh, CEO of the global executive recruitment agency Bentley Lewis, has already witnessed a U-turn to more flexible job ads. "I've noticed a definite rise in job postings advertising remote or hybrid work," Maleh tells Fortune. "We haven't worked on any searches that require the candidate to be in the office five days per week in the past six months globally."
"The shift demonstrates the cementing of hybrid work models, as CEOs increasingly recognize flexibility as a key factor in attracting and retaining top talent."
So it's official: Leaders who believe that office workers will be back at their desks five days a week in the near future are now in the small minority. It's a complete 360 on their stance last year, when 62% of CEOs surveyed predicted that working from home would end by 2026. At the time, 90% of CEOs even admitted that they were so steadfast on summoning staff back to their vertical towers that they were sweetening the pot with salary raises, promotions, and favorable assignments to those who showed face more.
But now, bosses are backtracking: Nearly half of CEOs have concluded that the future of work is hybrid — up from 34% last year. What's more, a sizable chunk of CEOs aren't just embracing working from home on Fridays, they're going one step further and ditching the workday altogether. KPMG found that a third of CEOs are exploring the feasibility of a four-day week at their firm...
Research has echoed that nearly half of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated, and 29% of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. It perhaps explains why, as KPMG's data shows, CEOs are now waking up to the fact that the future of work is probably the happy medium of hybrid... Lewis Maleh, CEO of the global executive recruitment agency Bentley Lewis, has already witnessed a U-turn to more flexible job ads. "I've noticed a definite rise in job postings advertising remote or hybrid work," Maleh tells Fortune. "We haven't worked on any searches that require the candidate to be in the office five days per week in the past six months globally."
"The shift demonstrates the cementing of hybrid work models, as CEOs increasingly recognize flexibility as a key factor in attracting and retaining top talent."
Apostrophe for plural (Score:3)
Why does the headline use an apostrophe to make a word plural?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Som writer's argh dumb, and there editor's two.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the second headline I've seen like that this month. There may have been more that I didn't notice.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a contraction, which calls for an apostrophe.
Re:Apostrophe for plural (Score:4, Informative)
Its not a contraction its an acronym, and no, it doesn't.
Strictly CEO is an initialism not an acronym (Score:5, Informative)
initialism:an abbreviation consisting of the first letters of each word in the name of something, pronounced as separate letters: HTML is an initialism of HyperText Markup Language.
acronym:an abbreviation consisting of the first letters of each word in the name of something, pronounced as a word e.g. LASER, NASA, NATO
I must admit It has become common for people to refer to initialisms as acronyms so the distinction may be a thing of the past.
In either case an apostrophe should not be used in the plural form.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're right that it's not a contraction. I have no excuse, and hang my head in shame.
Re: (Score:2)
Its not a contraction its an acronym, and no, it doesn't.
I think people tend to put apostrophes in pluralized acronyms - or rather, 'initialisms' - for the same reason they put them in contractions. That is, they're aware that an apostrophe stands in for missing letters. In this case, all of the letters between the "O" and the "s" in "Officers" are missing.
I often add an apostrophe in such cases, even though I'm fully aware of the distinction between contractions and acro... er, initialisms. It's a stylistic thing, and probably a much lesser sin than that of spel
Re: (Score:2)
Adding an apostrophe here makes it possessive, so the CEO owns a Finally, as in it is 'the CEO's finally.' Regardless there should not be an apostrophe there, even ChatGPT would probably get that right.
Re: Apostrophe for plural (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apostrophe for plural (Score:4, Interesting)
In response to other comments here - it is not a contraction; it is not a possessive case; "it's not grammatically correct" is not correct but not necessarily wrong.
CEO's.
CEO is an acronym.
The title pluralizes the acronym (noun phrase Chief Executive Officer) which is used as a noun.
Plural of the acro-noun could be CEOs or CEO's. There is no right or wrong, just a matter of convention.
Conventions about such usages of punctuation tend to evolve with time, even going back and forth.
In 1906, University of Chicago published its Manual of Style.
[Note that "its" is written without apostrophe even though it is a possessive case, necessary to avoid confusion with "it's" for "it is". There are of necessity a lot of ad hoc exceptions.]
The Manual of Style was started as a set or rules for their Press, their in house print-publishing activities, in order to have uniformity of type, press practices, and appearance of the finished works. It became so popular that it was published as a book in 1906, expanded second edition 1910, and ongoing new editions.
The 1906 and 1910 editions state, under rules for apostrophe:
149. The plural of numerals, and of rare or artificial noun-coinages, is formed by the aid of an apostrophe and s; of proper nouns of more than one syllable ending in a sibilant, by adding and apostrophe alone (monosyllabic proper names ending in a sibilant add es; others, s) : [examples] in the 1900's; in two's and three's, the three R's, the Y. M. C. A.'s; "these I-just-do-as-I-please's;" "all the Tommy Atkins' of England" (but: the Rosses and the MacDougalls).
The Chicago Manual of Style became a defacto standard, used and sworn on by writers, editors, publishers everywhere, but it was not the only guide, not the only authority, and certainly not statutory law.
The rules are just a matter of convention, and conventions and styles change.
According to these rules, the proper presentation of the above title should be C. E. O.'s.
But, mostly we no longer use periods in acronyms (aka "artificial noun-coinages"), another convention that has changed, and there is now a strong tendency to drop apostrophe when pluralizing special-case nouns.
If you look at the history of punctuation (something I have actually studied and written about), there is a general trend. When there are changes in society, culture, technology that introduce new words and modes of written expression, the early tendency is to write new word combinations with punctuation, such as hyphen or apostrophe, to deliberately indicate that the component words are conventionally separate but are being joined as a new concept. As those once-new words become entrenched in the language, the punctuation gradually drops and the hyphenated or apostrophized phrases become normative as single words written with letters only.
Also, when you speak, it all sounds the same, so the listener infers meaning from the articulation but also from pitch, intonation, rhythm, body language, etc. In written language, punctuation takes the place of those other cues when several interpretations might be possible. Punctuation serves to clarify meaning, that's all. Regardless what the conventions or the word cops might have to say, an author should always write what best and unequivocally clarifies meaning in a way that is fluid and transparent for the reader, and that can mean adjusting punctuation for specific instances
CEO's is correct. CEOs would also have been correct.
I was taught in school to apostrophize acronyms. Now, I hardly ever do, which is the prevailing convention this year.
In 20-30 years, it might be different again.
Re: (Score:2)
CEOs'
Re: (Score:2)
As already pointed out, to the point of exhaustion:
NOT an acronym
's communicates possession.
CEO's is wrong in the context of the sentence and all involved should be taken out back and shot lest the evil persist.
All of those claiming its use in this context is correct should be taken out baclk and flogged to cleanse them of their infection.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's not considered incorrect grammar, but I sure don't like it either.
Testing (Score:2)
Re:Testing (Score:5, Funny)
Dick (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Before we settled on me coming in 2 days a week, it was zero days a week, and losing me will hurt them more than it will hurt me, and they know that.
They argued that it's more helpful for other people there to be able to come into my office and directly interface with me for handling problems, and I agreed.
I felt like we hashed it out and came to a good compromise.
Re:Dick (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
For most 'meetings' voice only is better anyway. I don't want to see your face, you definitely don't want to see mine. My camera is 'broken'. (It's really a sticker, but I'm not going to tell them that.)
And most of the time I don't even bother going to the home office, it's easier to work from bed or the couch. Headphones, Apple Remote Desktop, and 95% of the time I don't have to leave the bed for work if I don't want to. The other 5% I have to actually touch something, so there's no way to do it remot
Re: (Score:2)
For most meetings voice only is better so the narcissist can drone on forever and ever and you can still get some meaningful work done while ignoring the idiot.
Re: (Score:3)
(*) Advice does not apply if your profession is the oldest in the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the oldest profession was started by the guy that said "Hey, so you're interested in my sister...".
Re: (Score:2)
You could always do something using OBS' virtual camera thing. It's actually a setting now where OBS can be used as a virtual webcam for meetings. I think it became really popular during the pandemic to the point where it's a preset when it asks how to configure itself.
So use OBS and let the camera effects fly. You could always make yourself really small in the frame, make your head bounce around the screen, or do other effects.
Re: (Score:2)
CubeWorlds are shit, and I wouldn't blame someone for not waning to go back to that.
I have an office. I definitely prefer my spare-bedroom-converted-into-home-office at home, but at least when I am in my office at... the office, it's also a generally nice experience.
In fact, I think if your employer doesn't give you an office, they *shouldn't* need you to come in, period.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Dick (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
That's everyone else's problem, not mine. You wanted me to turn on the cam, now suffer!
Re: Dick (Score:2)
I prefer meetings where the team isn't kicked out of the room when we go 5 minutes over. There is just one too many people to get through a 1 hour status meeting and I'm the extra person since I'm the most recent.
360 is right back around, dummy (Score:5, Informative)
t's a complete 360 on their stance last year
complete 360
360
It's no wonder Yahoo became irrelevant
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no actual journalism on most of these sites, especially Yahoo. Instead they have people writing marketing Copy, and it only has to be good enough to get your attention and have you click on something.
Additionally in media you can't aim for average intelligence and average education. You have to aim a bit below average in order to capture the largest possible market. This is why I believe modern media seems incredibly moronic. A big portion of articles appear to be written for adults that aren't comf
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is still 2.5 years left to finish the second 180 on time.
Re: (Score:2)
Complete 360 (Score:5, Funny)
I guess basic math is not a requirement at Fortune.
Re: (Score:2)
Math might be a requirement, but geometry certainly is not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Complete 360 (Score:2)
Give the AI who wrote the article a break.
What goes around comes around (Score:3)
During covid they told us to stay away from the office and come in on pain of dismissal unless for a very good reason. Fine, so we stayed away. Now you want us back, aww, tough luck, suck it up.
Covid changed a lot of things , not all of them for the better, but for a lot of white collar workers - not all I grant you - working from home a few days a week is a real bonus and helps oil the wheels of their life to make it perhaps a bit easier than it would otherwise be particularly for those of us with kids.
Re: (Score:1)
The only problem I have with Covid is that it's over.
World's smallest violin for "defeated" CEOs (Score:2)
People are sick and tired of wasting their time commuting -- especially 1 to 2 hours PER day. The fact that they can do their job (probably even better) from home just demonstrates that the CEO's thinking is archaic, not "defeated".
My boss worked at home, but would NOT let us do it (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Crappy people everywhere.
Indeed. The only real problem the human race has.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's a poem you should use.
"Dear boss,
I found something new.
More of money,
less of YOU"
Re: (Score:2)
Not a real solution (Score:2)
I've been fully remote since 2020, and I have no intention of accepting a job that requires "hybrid" work schedules, unless I'm *completely* out of options. Hybrid, in my opinion, is the worst of both worlds. You have to go to the office several days a week, braving potentially long commutes. And when you get there, your coworkers aren't there anyway, because they probably work in India or Pakistan. So now you're *in* the office, still on Zoom or Teams all day. And because the rotation tends to shift, you d
Re: (Score:2)
Not the defeat you were looking for (Score:1)
Fortune or someone similar has putting out a "Return to Office is Dead" article every 6 months or so. A couple of more iterations should do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Give it time. CEOs and other idiots take a while to realize changes.
Amazing herd mentality (Score:3)
It's actually kind of surprising that so many CEOs have such a herd mentality.
I watched two of them witness first hand that productivity actually went up during work from home, but both of them clearly got the "get everyone back in the office" itch pretty quickly. Fortunately, the one I work for now accepted reality, however reluctantly.
Hmm, so maybe it's not a herd mentality, it's just a natural instinct and they all have it, lol
Re: (Score:3)
It is the drive to control people. That does not work better with direct visibility, but it gives the illusion of working better.
Re: (Score:3)
CEOs are journal-driven. Unless it's written in some CEO journal, it's not true.
Just wait... (Score:2, Insightful)
'Defeated' CEO's Finally Concede Hybrid Working Is Here to Stay
...until the next big recession where everybody is begging for any job they can get, even if it means full-time back to the office.
Re: Just wait... (Score:1)
Have you tried to find a job today? There is a reason why the hybrid policy is working. The democratic government does not want you working from home. Surprisingly, trump's administration championed WFH and the media want to villainize him for other reasons. But the correlation don't lie
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Amazing, so Trump managed to get the whole fucking world to turn to WFH?
That guy is even more powerful than even he himself things. Or... alternatively... you put way, way too much faith in a single figurehead and didn't realize that the POTUS has jack shit to do with it.
You don't have to be wise to be a CEO (Score:2)
They're just people... with the right personality traits (which are usually not ones we'd call 'good') and the right circumstances to get them there. Usually they are born into a certain amount of wealth, and they have less empathy than you might be comfortable with. They have a few hundred rules they've memorized to do their jobs as you have memorized a similar number for yours, regardless of what you do.
On average they do not have abnormally high intelligence, or wisdom, or knowledge, or any of that. T
Re: (Score:2)
Wise? The average CEO can be replaced by a magic-8-ball without any loss of quality.
Please, these idiots aren't capable of finding their way out of a paper basket. The only reason they're so overpaid is that they're pretty much what the aristocracy used to be back in the good old days, a bunch of good ol' boys who stuck together and shoved money each other's way.
The only reason these useless spongers are still alive is that they ain't worth the jail time to rid the world of them.
How did they lose? (Score:2)
They won. Of course they won they have unlimited money and power because we refuse to take even a smidge of it away from them.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk for yourself. I work where I want and when I want.
Granted, having a very rare skill set in very high demand helps.
Re: How did they lose? (Score:2)
He expects his employer to ship the urinals to his house for cleaning. It's like Powercntrl said, he doesn't see the bigger picture. To him, a job is just a way to make money, and he believes he has a natural right to money therefore he has a natural right to a job. He doesn't understand that when you engage in trade, it's always a given that the other person values what they gave you less than what you gave them, and vice versa. In his mind, anybody who isn't him should always value what they're giving mor
Re: (Score:2)
a job is just a way to make money
What else would it be?
I need money, not an occupation. I'm quite capable of keeping myself occupied just fine.
Re: How did they lose? (Score:2)
For most of us, when we do a job, we're actually producing something value.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been a consultant for far too long to keep that charade up any longer.
Quite seriously, if I do a job, I want to get paid. That's all there is. I have hobbies that are productive and that I enjoy, and that takes care of my need to do something of value. When I work, I want money.
Re: How did they lose? (Score:2)
Do you expect money in exchange for nothing?
Re: (Score:2)
I expect money in exchange for what you value.
Re: How did they lose? (Score:2)
See? That wasn't so hard.
Re: (Score:2)
That you attribute value to something isn't my fault, though.
Support for remote work is shrinking (Score:2)
The elephant in the room is that the KPMG report shows that support for remote work has shrunk from very low support to even lower support. That is, there is significant movement from mandating 5 days a week to mandating 1 to 4 days a week but nothing towards 0 days a week.
The other weird part of the report is that the percentage of "no response" grew from 0% to 17%, perhaps suggesting that many executives are still holding out for a full return to the office but are not willing to say so directly.
Morons with power acknowledging reality? (Score:2)
Such a bold move. Well, I just quite a side-job, because unlike our initial agreement they now wanted me to work in the office. Don't think they can replace me, but that is not my problem.
They have a phrase for this (Score:2)
When the employer doesn't have better options than compromise, they will compromise.
\o/ (Score:1)
1) Get list of companies whose CEOs expect a full return to the office
2) Short their stock
3) Profit!!!
Remote now a significant economic choice. (Score:2)
At first the general lifestyle improvement made remote work really accepted by the masses.
But now it's an economic one more than anything else. The cost of living pressures seen around the world are making it impractical or even impossible for workers to be located near enough to the office to accept a 5 day week in the office.
Cost of living increases have dramatically outpaced salary growth. With new higher interest rates that seem to be settling into a new long term level these pressures will remain.
Add
Re: (Score:1)
One thing is for certain: The pendulum will swing too far and some companies that pushed it too far will be forced to backtrack a bit.
What is not clear is what "too far" is. Is 5 days too far? Probably. 4 days? Maybe. My guess is that 3 days is where things reach an equilibrium after they overshoot. Or it will be 4 days but they look the other way if you only come in 3 (because N-1 is what many end up doing anyway after holidays, PTO, sick days, appointments, etc.). Maybe it will be 4 days but the con
Hybrid has the worst of both (Score:2)