However, the decision leaves some analysts perplexed, as it seems to challenge the paradigm according to which smart working would be the future of work, or at least a part of it. So what are the reasons that led Amazon to this decision?
The benefits of working together according to Andy Jassy
The main reason behind Andy Jassy’s decision is the need to work together. In short, Amazon’s top executive says that working in the same place makes it easier to learn from colleagues, and to shape, practise and strengthen the company culture. It also becomes easier to collaborate, brainstorm and create new ideas: all these activities become smoother, as work teams tend to be better connected with one another.
In his 2023 memo, he also says: “I’m optimistic that this change will give a boost to the thousands of businesses located around our urban headquarters...”. The transition is likely to be gradual; bear in mind that Amazon has thousands of employees to bring back, but the path is set. And these are the reasons given by Amazon’s CEO.
The pros and cons of smart working and the environmental impact
Bear in mind, then, that other national and international companies had already begun to end smart working, which in many cases was regarded as an extraordinary event caused by a pandemic, an exceptional circumstance in fact. Let us make a few observations
The cons of smart working
Experts have found that smart working can have negative aspects that should be taken seriously into account
One of the main drawbacks is the lack of social interaction, which can lead to feelings of isolation and, in some cases, to a decline in motivation and productivity.
Integrating new employees in a remote working context, where constant interaction is missing, can be complex, making it difficult to pass on the company culture and operating practices.
The intensive use of technology at home can cause stress in some people (technostress) and mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression, due to prolonged isolation.
Being constantly connected to the company has given some individuals the perception of constant surveillance; the office calling at any hour has, in some cases, become more than a habit, a working method. This feeling, often real, of never finishing the working day is constantly present in the lives of many people.
The pros of smart working
From what has been said so far, the discussion would seem to be over. Everyone in the office, then. Yet smart working should not be discarded entirely, as it also has positive aspects. Let us briefly look at the most significant ones.
Smart working offers workers greater flexibility regarding working hours and places, allowing better management of time between professional and personal life.
Studies show that smart workers report higher levels of well-being than colleagues who work in the office, with improved engagement and job satisfaction. It does not apply to everyone, as we have said.
In many cases, smart workers have seen increases in productivity.
The impact on property has also been significant. Smart workers have felt the need for more living space. This has encouraged a move from city centres to outlying areas where prices are lower, to the benefit of the repopulation of some peripheral areas or villages that had been abandoned.
Workation and digital nomadism are another consequence, which some might consider positive, almost a dream. It consists of living and working in holiday destinations and, in some cases, changing the places where one lives and works
South Working is another phenomenon. It involves people who work for northern companies, have moved to the south and work remotely. Workers choose to move to the South for various reasons, including the desire to improve their quality of life, reduce the cost of living and be closer to their families. This shift could have the potential to ‘revitalise’ southern areas, helping to combat depopulation and stimulate the local economy.
For example, working from home two days a week could reduce emissions by 480 kg of CO2 a year per person
Smart working and the environment
Among all these points, there is one in particular we would like to dwell on: the environmental impact.
According to a study by the International Energy Agency (IEA), working from home can lead to overall energy savings of up to 24 million tonnes of CO2 globally, taking into account both the reduction in travel and the increase in domestic energy consumption.
For example, a study by ENEA found that smart working can reduce daily travel by about an hour and a half per person, reaching a total of 46 million kilometres saved, and consequently saving more than 2.8 million tonnes of CO2.
The environmental issue therefore remains fundamental. The age-old question arises again of whether the concept of growth and development can be compatible with ecological needs.
A middle ground, such as working only some days in the office and others from home, could be an easily workable solution and could benefit the environment. For example, working from home two days a week could, as we have already said, prevent the emission of 480 kg of CO2 a year per person
The middle ground?
Yet the big tech companies themselves, despite the trend towards returning to the office, continue to actively develop electronic systems and services for remote working. It seems, then, that the future of work is not definitively written, and that a balance between physical presence and flexibility may be the key to reconciling the needs of companies and workers. Which direction will the world of work take, then? Will the hybrid model shape our professional lives, or will we witness new, perhaps unexpected, changes? The question remains open.
